In the first week of September I was visiting Athens to attend the European International Studies Conference. At the conference I presented work on epistemic infrastructures and the sea, as well as acted as discussant for a panel on Concepts and Methods in International Practice Theory.
Part of the stay was a visit to ENISA, the EU’s cyber security agency. We discussed ENISA’s work in critical infrastructure protection and what role the agency might have in protection of subsea data cables. We also had the pleasure to meet Nisa, the agency’s cat.
On Monday and Tuesday, I had the pleasure to attend at a meeting that brought the community of scholars working on diplomatic practices together in Copenhagen. The event was organized by Rebecca Adler-Nissen’s DIPLOFACE project.
With 50+ scholars attending and presenting their ideas and book projects, the event well documented the strong overlap between diplomacy studies and international practice theory. The fact that the majority of practice scholars in International Relations works in one way or the other on diplomatic practices, has brought up some criticism against practice theory as to focused on global elite. Yet, one should not overlook the fact that diplomacy is one of the foundational practice of international relations. What became clear at the meeting, is that scholars are also substantially interested in the practices of international administrators or scientific experts, which may (or may not) participate in diplomacy as practice.
A key cross-cutting theme of the event were also the substantial transformations that diplomacy faces in an age of increasingly digitally mediated interactions and the return of geopolitical discourse.
Our new edited volume provides new directions for the practice turn in international relations. Co-edited with Alena Drieschova and Ted Hopf, chapter authors explore concepts such as knowledge, power, resistance, norms, evolution, repetition, and visuality, their role in practice theorizing, how they offer gateways to dialogue among practice scholars and with constructivism, institutionalism, and discourse theory, and how these concepts provide new answer to theory puzzles such as normativity and change.
How can we conceptualize the relations between the land and the sea? This is the key driving question of a workshop organized by the Danish Institute for International Studies, that I am participating in on the 25th and 26th of August.
In my own contribution, I study the land-sea nexus as an example of ‘nexification’. I am interested in the sociology that drives the linkage. Broadly I distinguish three types: mergers driven by intellectual curiosity, interested in how the two hang together (largely anchored in history and anthropology), those that argue that the sea is increasingly governed by rationalities that persist on land (in international law and geography), and studies driven by policy demands, that investigate how solutions to maritime problems may be sought on land.
As more and more geopolitical attention turns to the Western Indian Ocean, in a new commentary I explore the role of India in collective maritime security. I argue that India should continue on the course it charted last year in the UN Security Council: to work towards collective multilateral maritime security mechanisms on a regional and global level.
Today I had the opportunity to speak at an hybrid event organized by the Indian Ocean Commission and the Charles Telfair Centre on maritime security in the Western Indian Ocean (https://lnkd.in/dz2URFYP). The lively discussion revolved around issues of which maritime security issues to prioritized, whether regional institutions deliver, and how to interpret the new geopolitical thinking in the region.
In my comments, I drew on our recent analysis, published in African Security Review, coauthored with Jan Stockbruegger (https://lnkd.in/d2KXBj24). My key take away points from the event:
In early 2022 a subtle, but substantial shift took place in the Western Indian Ocean’s security architecture: The Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia (known as CGPCS) closed shop. It was replaced by a new format. Yet, not much action followed. In a new commentary, I investigates the prospects of the new grouping. Running through four scenarios, I argue that the group is most likely going to become a sleeping beauty.
Last year the UK government started a process to refresh its maritime security strategy. In what was an extensive process of consultations with governmental entities, but also academia, industry and civil society, as part of SafeSeas activities, we had a strong role in the process. This concerned in particular expertise on coordination, blue crimes, but also emerging issues, such as environmental security at sea, climate change and the importance of critical maritime infrastructures.
We wrote an article on the strategy work, held a number of meetings with the drafting team, and a larger expert workshop on the implementation of the strategy (documented here). Overall this presented a focused and impactful academic intervention and highlights how academics can bring reflexivity and a forward-looking attitude to a political process.
In spring this year the Contact Group on Piracy off the Coast of Somalia – a multilateral grouping I have been studying over the last decade – has changed its mandate and name. This week I met with representatives from Seychelles and the Indian Ocean Commission who are part of the strategy group of the Contact Group to discuss the future set up.
Together we worked on the draft of the final report of the strategy group and next steps. I had also the opportunity to visit the Regional Coordination Operations Centre in Seychelles and to learn about their upcoming activities.
While travelling, one encounters quite some memorials; they commemorate battles, heroes, accidents or disasters. During my visit to Eastern Africa, I had recently the opportunity to visit the Genocide memorial in Kigali commemorating the 1994 Rwandan genocide, and the memorial of the 2013 Westgate shopping attack in Nairobi’s Karura Forrest. These are memorials of human catastrophes and sites of contemplating how to prevent similar events..
Yet, in the age of the anthropocene, also animals face horrendous catastrophes and entire species are dying out. How shall we commemorate them?
A recent visit to the Ol Pejeta conservancy brought me to an interesting site. The park has as one of its many attractions a rhino cemetery. The majority of rhinos buried at the site, fell victim to poachers. They were hunted down for their horns. It sends a powerful reminder of the tragic consequences of the poaching crisis.
But perhaps most important is another grave. The resting ground of Sudan, the last male of his species, the Northern White Rhino. It is the first ecocide memorial, I have been present at so far.
