The Centre for Geopolitics and Security in Realism Studies is pleased to announce that we are a coalition partner of the 2018 edition of Debating Security Plus, the sixth global online brainstorm organised by Friends of Europe from 19 – 20 Jun 2018.
About Debating Security Plus
Debating Security Plus will be held entirely online and is hosted on a specifically designed platform to help facilitate the participation of thousands from around the world. Past editions have gathered up to several thousand senior international participants and security experts: civilian and military, journalists, members of parliament, representatives of international organisations and civil society. Recommendations from previous security brainstorms fed into the policy thinking that shaped NATO's Strategic Concept in 2010 and the EU's Global Strategy in 2016.
Programme
The online brainstorm will be set up across six discussion themes that will run in parallel from 19 June, 09:00 to 20 June 20:00. Leading personalities from the sector will contribute video messages before logging in to engage live with the thousands of participants throughout the exercise, sparking lively discussion and pushing this global security community to put forth policy recommendations.
Conversations will be moderated by leading think-tankers from around the world and to steer the discussions towards concrete recommendations by the end of the 36h online event.
All timings are Central European Summer Time (UTC+2)
Countering hybrid threats in the cyber age
From cyber-espionage and disruptive attacks on critical infrastructure to interference in elections, propaganda, and disinformation campaigns, institutions around the world are increasingly under threat from state or non-state operations. These (mostly digital) risks – if unmitigated – have raised fears of serious breakdowns in states’ economies and societies, increasing the risks of conflict and threatening societal resilience.
The past decade has witnessed a significant increase in hybrid tactics, notably cyberattacks, on businesses—including banks and energy companies- and states with highly developed digital infrastructure, carried out both directly by hostile states and through supposedly independent hackers, often used as proxies for states’ to project power at home and abroad. In particular, beyond the international limelight thrown on Pyongyang’s progress in developing a nuclear weapon capable of striking North America, countries like China and North Korea are significantly increasing their offensive capabilities in cyberspace. What can governments, companies and citizens do to strengthen their resilience to cyberattacks? The ability and willingness to respond to cyber-attacks is instrumental to a credible deterrence by actors such as the EU and NATO—should they be developing the use of offensive cyber capabilities in the face of malicious attacks? One of the key recommendations coming out of the 2017 edition of DS+ was to create a global cyber convention to set out international definitions and rules in cyberspace – what obstacles stand in the way?
Increasing digitalisation has enabled Artificial Intelligence (AI) to flourish, and has been seen by policymakers as a development which can help to enhance civil and military capabilities and services. However, the international community has raised concerns over the lack of human control in modern warfare. Where do we draw the line on autonomy and warfare? How prepared are military forces, including NATO, for AI warfare? Is the West already losing the AI arms race to China and Russia?
Europe as a global security actor
With its emphasis on soft/smart power and multilateral diplomacy, the EU appears to be out of step with a multipolar world increasingly characterised by hard power, great power rivalries and zero-sum games. With the US no longer ready to continue its lead on global security issues, Europe is looking more carefully at its own defence capabilities and role as a global security actor.
The resuscitation of meaningful defence cooperation through Permanent Structured Cooperation (“PESCO”) could have a significant impact on European collective defence in numerous ways which largely depend on the leaders and policymakers steering the project. Given uncertainty over the future direction of US foreign policy, the EU has illustrated genuine political will and a sense of urgency in seeking to up its game as a security provider. Is there a credible European alternative to US leadership, in NATO or through the EU? With the United Kingdom one of only two true military powers in Europe, what impact will Brexit have on the security and defence of Europe, and the EU’s global operations?
Despite the EU’s efforts to build up collective defence – which risks being challenged by a rapidly deteriorating environment in its Eastern and Southern neighbourhoods – the EU’s diplomatic and security performance on the global stage is often questioned by the international community. Towards the Western Balkans, is the EU doing enough on security, radicalisation and the fight against organised crime? What role should Europe play in bringing peace to Syria, given the growing involvement of Iran, Russia and Turkey? How should Europe respond to China’s growing power, especially in the South China Sea and as regards the security implications of the Belt and Road Initiative? Is the EU seen as a credible security actor by the rest of the world, and especially in Asia?
Regional approaches to global migration
Responses to global migration- caused by a multiplicity of interrelated factors including conflicts, resource scarcity and climate change- remains largely uncoordinated at the global level. The UN recognises the need for a comprehensive approach to human mobility and is working on adopting global compacts on migration and refugees in 2018. But such initiatives face many obstacles on an international level. As such, learning from local challenges in different parts of the world can help us better understand and address the linkages between migration, security and development.
Although overall numbers are down, migration flows to Europe have not stopped. The 2017 DS+ report proposed to instigate a better dialogue between the EU and member states on the urgent need for legal migration pathways. How can the EU improve its responsiveness and preparedness for migrants arriving at its borders? How robust has Europe’s approach been in managing the migration influx, particularly with Turkey?
In the Middle East and Africa, economic weakness as well as instability, insurgency and conflict are persistent. What are the lessons learned from countries in the region as regards the mass waves of migration? How important is the role of development aid in addressing migration in this region?
In Asia, the persecution of the Muslim Rohingya population in Myanmar and the inadequate response of local and regional authorities to the crisis has brought to the fore the weaknesses of Southeast Asian responses on refugees and migration. How can regional organisations such as ASEAN become more actively involved in migration policies? How can the region’s states prepare for a growing risk of ‘sinking islands’ and migration driven by climate change?
US President Donald Trump’s tough policies on migration are also casting doubts on the long-standing migration flows to the US from its southern neighbours. Moreover, emerging economic and political issues such as those currently witnessed in Venezuela can further escalate and cause a violent conflict, increasing the number of migrants. Is Latin America prepared to deal with instability and migration?
Fraying arms control regimes
The global nuclear order has been changing in recent years. Energy security, fluctuating oil prices as well as uncertainties caused by climate change have contributed to a renewed interest in nuclear power as an energy source for the future. At the same time, there are growing concerns about current nuclear non-proliferation regimes overseeing nuclear affairs. 2017 witnessed some progress on the issue of nuclear proliferation as 122 states voted for the adoption of a Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, a first global and legally-binding agreement banning nuclear weapons, and an alliance of nongovernmental organisations fighting for the same cause received the Nobel Peace Prize.
However, states continue to modernise their strategic arsenals and in practice the reality suggests arms control agreements are far from ideal - North Korea’s recent testing of a nuclear weapon and missiles claimed to have the ability to reach the US is one of such examples. Enforcement of international arms control regime continues to struggle, failing to discourage states that seek to acquire their own nuclear capabilities.
A key recommendation from the 2017 DS+ has been to engage regional powers to de-escalate nuclear tensions. While the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons is a significant achievement, the response of the international community to nuclear proliferation remains constrained by complex political issues and dilemmas. How can this global community, including NATO and the UN, improve the capability of regional players—such as China—to approach and manage nuclear proliferation? Thinking beyond nuclear, can we encourage progress in arms control regimes in areas such as chemical weapons, as well as in new areas such as cyber and artificial intelligence?
Realigning the crime-terror nexus
Over the past year, the Islamic State has sustained increased pressure and further military defeat of the terrorist group in Syria and Iraq is expected. However, the severity of the threat in Europe, Southeast Asia and Africa must not be underestimated, and may even increase. Continuing instability in the Middle East and North Africa, including the establishment of new footholds by the Islamic State into the Maghreb, is a major security challenge. The last years have also seen an increase in terrorist attacks by extreme right, left-wing and anarchist groups, causing a significant threat to governments in the West.
In Europe, cooperation between law enforcement and governments with relevant actors is getting better: governments have improved their information system and police forces are increasingly working with financial institutions and tech companies to track organised crime and disrupt the means by which terrorists finance their operations. How can the relationship between the police and the judiciary be reinforced to tackle the connection between human and drugs trafficking and the financing of terrorism?
However, flaws in counter-radicalisation and terrorism strategies remain. The international community should develop a comprehensive response to the rehabilitation and reintegration of former jihadi radicals and returning terrorist fighters while also tackling violence by far-right groups and anarchists. A key recommendation from DS+ 2017 is the need to involve communities, families, schools and community policing in counter-radicalisation strategies. Do local entities, including community police have the right training and resources to tackle radicalisation and violent extremism? How can we ensure that intelligence sharing between local and national police and security actors is more efficient? What role can the police play in developing better early warning systems by harnessing the intelligence within local communities?
Russia, Europe and the US - scenarios of the future in a turbulent time
What will the world look like in 2028? What effect will the political decisions made by today’s leaders have in ten years’ time? Are we moving towards ‘the end of history’, a new Cold War, or even World War 3?
Cascading and unpredictable crises are becoming the new normal. With relations between Russia and the West at the lowest point in decades, and at a time of fundamental change not only in the West’s relations with Russia but also within the EU and in the transatlantic partnership, now is the time to think ahead and consider what future relations between Russia, Europe and the US could – and should – look like.
In partnership with the Center for Transatlantic Relations at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies and the Robert Bosch Center at the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP), the 2018 DS+ brainstorm will test out different “scenarios of the future” for Russian-European-American relations.
Four alternative futures of Russian-Western relations in 2028 - some more likely than others- will be presented, with participants asked to work through the implications and consequences of such scenarios, and how we might anticipate and/or address them. How did we get to that particular future and how could we avoid it? Or alternatively, how did we get to that future and how could we make sure we do get there in 10 years?
Based on the feedback from participants on these scenarios of the future, we will come up with policy recommendations to be presented to key decision-makers, enabling them to reflect on the potential ramifications of the choices and policy decisions they are faced with today.
please register here: https://lnkd.in/gWcTUEm
