key: cord-0059239-t7eypr8z
authors: Brady, Anne-Marie; Thorhallsson, Baldur
title: Small States and the Turning Point in Global Politics
date: 2020-11-24
journal: Small States and the New Security Environment
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-51529-4_1
sha: 1d807ef92c61fd6905afe3637cb687842248435f
doc_id: 59239
cord_uid: t7eypr8z

This book uses the theory of shelter to examine how some representative small states in NATO, MENA, and Oceania are responding to the new geopolitical, geo-economic security environment. One third of the membership of NATO are small states, and most of NATO’s partners are small states too. All the major NATO powers have strategic interests in the regions of their partner states—so any security challenges or new developments there are of direct interest to NATO priorities. The global great powers of China, Russia, and the USA are once again jostling for dominance. Each small state has finite resources to protect itself, so each must find their own way to manage relations between the dominant powers while protecting their national interests. Do small states need political, economic and societal shelter provided by larger states and international organizations? This book extends theoretical debates on the role of small states in the changing international system, as well as on the issue of how states manage their relations between the major powers in the new security environment. The SSANSE project contributes new thinking on how small states can respond to the “new normal” in international security.

come to fruition. 1 The world is now seeing a return of both "might is right" politics and the reassertion of spheres of influence.

The very nature of conflict and how we define it is shifting too as foreign political interference, terrorism, and cyberattacks are on the increase. The boundaries between domestic and foreign policy are becoming less and less distinct. Porous borders, whether climactic, cyber, or physical, make it impossible for even small island nations such as Iceland and New Zealand, the home nations of the two editors of this book, to remain remote from the changing global order.

The new security environment is especially challenging for small states. Time and again, at great turning points in history, small states have been the pawns of great power competition. Small states are heavily affected by global shifts in power, and they must rely on the rule-based international order to protect their rights. Small-state security depends on stability, predictability, and cooperative solutions to global problems.

Small states are generally defined as those nations that are small in landmass, population, economy, and military capacity. Yet in the era of hybrid warfare, the old concepts of size of territory as a measure of relative power may no longer be as significant as the size of a nation's maritime or space boundaries-or cyber defence, national resilience, and unity, plus digital diplomacy capacity. 2 Henderson defined the characteristics of small states as follows: 1) low participation in international affairs due to limited resources; 2) narrow scope, as limited resources lead to the limiting of foreign policy interests and the small size of the state's foreign affairs bureaucracy restricts its ability to have a broad international role; 3) economic focus, a tendency to focus foreign affairs interests on economic issues and trade; 4) internationalism, as small states tend to rely heavily on multilateralism, international organisations, agreements, and alliances to protect national interests; 5) moral emphasis, as small states tend to be moralistic but have no resources to back up their rhetoric; and 6) tendency to be risk avoidant and fearful of alienating powerful states, though occasionally they can be risk takers. 3 Small states make up half of the membership of the United Nations. Our threeyear research project "Small States and the New Security Environment" (SSANSE) has assessed the defence and foreign policy choices and challenges of small states in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) such Albania, Denmark, Estonia, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Norway; NATO partner states like Armenia, Bahrain, Finland, Georgia, New Zealand, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates; as well as the situation in small island developing states (including overseas territories of NATO member France) in Oceania. All of these states must face up to the new security 1 Chris Seed, Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade, New Zealand, "Opening Remarks to Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Select Committee," New Zealand Parliament, December 12, 2020, h t t p s : / / w w w . p a r l i a m e n t . n z / r e s o u r c e / e n -N Z / 5 2 S C F D _ E V I _ 9 2 8 1 9 _ F D 3 0 1 3 / 51eea4ab1967c2ba7bdddb9d7d6824f0f8ba2e6e. 2 See Chaban et al. (2019) . 3 . environment and develop a nimble and proactive strategy to deal with it. Yet one of the characteristic weak points of small states is that they tend to be deficit in the dedicated think tanks and research institutes that provide governments with the deep policy analysis and contestable policy advice they need in a changing, challenging, geostrategic situation.

The SSANSE project is a preparedness initiative, examining the current defence and foreign policy choices and challenges of small states. The SSANSE project contributes new thinking on how small states can respond to the "new normal" in international security. We asked researchers to examine a series of questions, including the following:

• How can small states survive and prosper in the current unpredictable and hostile security environment? • How can small states best deal with new challenges, such as cyberattacks, political interference, and climate change? • How can small states compensate for their structural weaknesses?

• Should small states work more to partner with other like-minded small and medium power governments and give up the notion that they need to seek shelter with one or other of the great powers? • Is neutrality or pacifism the ultimate goal of an independent foreign policy path?

• How can small states make themselves more resilient in the new security environment? • For this book in particular, we looked at how the small states of NATO and partners are adjusting to the new geopolitical, geo-economic, security environment. Do they need political, economic and societal shelter provided by larger states and international organizations? • Do NATO small states manage the tension between alliance commitment and economics differently from non-NATO small states? • What are the core strategic interests of the small states we studied, and how can they be strengthened? • How can NATO better work with its partner small states in future?

The SSANSE research team organised several conferences and workshops in New Zealand, Iceland, and the USA to develop the ideas of the project. We also provided many open and closed-door policy briefings to policymakers as our analysis had a strong policy focus. The SSANSE Project leaders, Anne-Marie Brady and Baldur Thorhallsson, and co-directors, Margarita Šešelgytė and Alan Tidwell, led a team of international emerging, as well as senior, researchers to create a series of written projects responding to the parameters of investigation. The result of all this work was two edited books, 4 including this one; doctoral and masters' theses; op eds aimed at the wider public; and a series of policy briefs targeted at policymakers. 5 Our project has helped train a cohort of international young researchers on small state studies. We hope they will use this knowledge and training as a stepping stone to careers in diplomacy, defence, and academia.

There is an extensive body of research on small state theory upon which the SSANSE project was built, which exceeds what can be summarised or addressed here. 6 The University of Iceland's Centre for Small State Studies has fostered a number of research teams on small state studies resulting in influential publications such as Archer, Bailes, and Wivel's study of small states and international security; Ingebritsen, Neumann, Gstöhl, and Beyer's study on small states and international relations; and Bailes, Herolf, and Sundelius's study on Nordic states as small states. 7 Efraim Karsh has analysed the question of small states and neutrality. 8 Jeanne A. K. Hey has provided a useful overview of small state theory, 9 as did the work of Henderson, Jackson, and Kennaway in their studies on New Zealand as a small state. 10 Larsen has discussed the need for new thinking on NATO strategic policy and the need to work more closely with NATO partner states in order to respond to the "new normal" in security. 11 Overall, the majority of scholarly studies on small states have tended to focus on the small states of Europe. There has never before been a study specifically focusing on the foreign policies of the small states of NATO or the small states of Eastern Europe, Middle East and North Africa (MENA), or those of Oceania. Nor has any study evaluated small states from the perspective of NATO's strategic priorities, particularly in the light of the current global strategic environment.

Much of the small state theoretical literature is on the experiences of and outcomes for specific small states. We found that there is a scarcity in approaches and theories that draw lessons about small states in general. This is problematic since scholars of small states emphasise that small and large states are vastly different in terms of needs and challenges, and this ought to lead to different logics of behaviour.

The lack of theorising about small states means that there is a dearth of simple abstract frameworks for thinking intelligently about small states. In a sense, theories are like maps. They are intended to simplify the world by removing unnecessary details in an attempt to make it easier for us to navigate it. Unfortunately, there are few maps to guide our thinking about small states. This means that scholars of small states often have to rely on realist, liberal, and constructivist theories as they think about small states.

A common complaint is that both realist and liberal approaches are too imprecise for analysing small states' foreign policy. Realist theories are primarily concerned with large states and are derived from studies of great power politics. Critics of constructivism claim that it is not a comprehensive theory about international politics but rather a framework for thinking about social facts. This means that there are no consistent lessons that can be drawn from constructivism about small states, unless care is taken to craft specific theories about small states rooted in constructivist theory.

To fill the theoretical gap, a framework referred to as shelter theory has been developed over the last decade by scholars at the Centre for Small State Studies in Iceland. 12 This theoretical framework hopes to guide scholars, students, and policymakers to better evaluate the options and policies of small states, as well as forecast outcomes for small states.

Of course, like any other theory or framework, it is an un-nuanced depiction. It may tell us a lot about the challenges and opportunities facing small states, and their general patterns of behaviour, but it cannot perfectly explain every single action that a small state takes. The shelter theory framework is derived from the challenges and needs that the literature documents as unique to small states, as well as a large literature on the actions that small states have tended to take to alleviate the burdens and satisfy the needs that come with smallness.

Shelter theory holds that small states need to seek political, economic, and societal shelter. What this means is that there are certain inherent political, economic, and societal problems that small states face (or problems that small states need shelter from) and certain actions that small states take to alleviate these problems (what the framework refers to as "shelter-seeking"). 13 Small states need political, economic, and societal shelter provided by larger states and international organisations in order to thrive and cope with crises. Political shelter takes the form of direct and visible diplomatic or military backing and other strategic coverage at any given time of need provided by another state or an international organisation, as well as the protection provided by international rules and norms.

Small states are militarily weak as they have fewer resources, including human resources, which can be put towards military use. They lack the economies of scale needed for a strong military with diverse capabilities. Historically, small states' vulnerability to conquest and coercion was seen as their main vulnerability. Small states lack the resources to support a large diplomatic force, and they are unable to keep diplomatic missions in every corner of the world. Small state external affairs representatives often have to be generalists, as opposed to issue experts, which risks undercutting the knowledge and deliberation behind small state foreign policies and negotiations.

Due to the aforementioned disadvantages, whether explicitly or not, small states rely on the security assurances and military assistance of larger states or alliances. Small states also need diplomatic backing or assistance from other states. Shifting negotiations from bilateral to multilateral venues is favourable for small states as the norms and rules of international organisations can constrain the brute power of large states and reduce the power asymmetry between the large and the small states. 14 Economic shelter can take the form of direct economic assistance, a currency union, help from an external financial authority, beneficial loans, favourable market access, or a common market; it could even include access to strategic goods such as medical equipment, as was shown during the Covid-19 pandemic. Economic shelter can be provided by a more powerful country or by an international organisation. 15 Small states have small domestic markets, which means that their economies are more reliant on foreign trade, tourism, and foreign direct investment than those of large states. This dependence on external markets exposes small states to the instability of global markets and can lead to more volatility in the economies of small states. Small state economies rely on an open and stable world economy where they can trade freely.

Small state economies also tend to lack sectoral diversity. So unlike large and diverse economies, small state economic growth may fluctuate wildly depending on what occurs within a single sector. This means that small states frequently experience more booms and busts. When a crisis occurs, small state governments may lack the means to lift themselves up on their own. In contrast, medium and large powers have greater ability to redistribute resources from one sector or from one affected region to another and are thus able to dampen the blow of a temporary crisis. Yet in crisis situations-like Covid-19-the smallness of the small state economy can be an advantage, allowing small state governments greater agility to make policy adjustments.

Small states need to position themselves in a way where they access economic assistance in times of crisis. Small state governments do this by joining and supporting international organisations, such as the International Monetary Fund, or by developing strong ties to larger states. Economic shelter enables small states to reduce the frequency and severity of economic crises and to achieve greater prosperity.

Societal shelter refers to the importance of cultural transactions, the transfer of new ideas, norms, lifestyles, ideologies, myths, and ritual systems in order for small states to compensate for the lack of expertise in their small communities. 16 Traditional international relations theory tends to focus on the pursuit of security and prosperity, which are indeed important. However, shelter theory also holds that small states require societal shelter and that this need can account for some of the behaviour of small states. The extent of societal shelter that a small state has may also account for the quality of life within the small state. Small states' pursuit of societal shelter is potentially as important as the pursuit for political and economic shelter. This is one way that shelter theory clearly distinguishes itself from other alliance theories.

In the societal realm, small states may be at a disadvantage relative to larger societies. Some small states have homogenous populations, so there is a greater risk that these states may experience social stagnation, as there are potentially fewer unorthodox and influential innovators, artists, entrepreneurs, and leaders from which to draw on. Much more so than larger states, small states rely on interactions with other cultures, ideas, and ideologies to ensure that there is a healthy marketplace of ideas. Many small states take active measures to avoid isolation by importing innovation and ideas from other cultures. It is through constant interaction with other cultures, ideas, and ideologies that a society evolves and moves forward.

Shelter theory addresses three interrelated issues of common concerns to small states: the reduction of risk before a possible crisis event, assistance in absorbing shocks in times of crises, and help in recovering after such an event. In short, shelter theory posits that small states will need some form of external shelter in order to survive and prosper. They are dependent on the economic, political, and societal shelter provided by larger states, as well as regional and international organisations. 17 It should be noted that for many small and medium-sized countries, shelter is quite complicated. As the case studies in our book richly illustrate, small states may seek security shelter from traditional friends, diplomatic shelter from those same partners, while leaning heavily in to the multilateral system, and they seek economic shelter from a range of countries, not necessarily the same as those powers that provide them political, societal, and security shelter.

Shelter relations can have costs for the beneficiary. For instance, the post-2008 global financial crisis European Union-International Monetary Fund (EU-IMF) rescue packages were provided with strict conditions regarding states' domestic policies. NATO and EU shelter may carry considerable financial as well as political costs for small states. 18 The shelter provider tends to expect the protected state to follow its foreign policy preferences, and this may have a negative impact on small state domestic policies and domestic public opinion. 19 Seeking shelter can potentially cause rifts within small societies, which can be seen in the deep divisions in Iceland and New Zealand in relation to these two countries' special relationship with the US during the Cold War, 20 and up to the present day, and controversy over present-day relations with China.

The pursuit of shelter, its costs, benefits, or lack thereof, should be carefully examined by small state policymakers. Shelter theory could help shed light on a small state's bilateral political, economic, and societal relations with larger powers such as China, Russia, and the USA. It may also help to evaluate the cost-benefit balance of multilateral cooperation. The choice of a shelter provider will always depend on the proportion of benefits to cost.

Our book Small States and the New Security Environment uses the theory of shelter to examine how some representative small states in NATO, MENA, and Oceania are responding to new and old security threats in the new security environment. One third of the membership of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) are small states, and most of NATO's partners are small states too. All the major NATO powers have strategic interests in the regions of their partner states-so any security challenges or new developments there are of direct interest to NATO priorities. NATO is at a pivotal point as it responds to the complex new security environment. The Alliance is reassessing these threats and planning how to respond. The new security environment is forcing NATO to consider re-conceptualising its Strategic Concept, set at the 2010 Lisbon Summit, which is currently defined as collective defence, crisis management, and cooperative security.

The small states of NATO such as Albania, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Norway and NATO partner or neighbouring small states such as Armenia, Bahrain, Kuwait, New Zealand, Qatar, and United Arab Emirates are on the front lines of the challenges in the new security environment. The global great powers of China, Russia, and the USA are once again jostling for dominance. Each small state has finite resources to protect itself, so each must find their own way to manage relations between the dominant powers while protecting their national interests.

Small States and the New Security Environment extends theoretical debates on the role of small states in the changing international system, as well as on the issue of how states manage their relations between the major powers in the new security environment. We examine how two representative small states, Norway and New Zealand, engage in policymaking, lobbying, and maintaining shelter in the changing politics of Washington, DC. We look at small states' risks and opportunities related to the global proliferation of armed drones and the challenge hybrid warfare poses for traditional defence mechanisms. We discuss a case study of shelter balancing in action, examining how tiny Albania manages political interference attempts by China while developing economic links at the same time as maintaining strong political links with the USA while leaning in close to NATO and working hard to get into the EU. We look at how small states like Denmark have responded to Russia's pressure in the North Atlantic by building a NATO West Nordic Security Zone. We look at the New Slovak Security Strategy in the context of V4 and Euro-Atlantic security environment, with a specific focus on Visegrad security and defence cooperation and their contribution to NATO. We analyse how the Baltic states have engaged in close regional defence cooperation and societal resilience strategies in order to respond to increased Russian aggression in Eastern Europe.

We also look at small European neutrals such as Ireland and Malta and examine their relations with NATO. We found they have extensive cooperation with NATO and use their neutrality to gain greater status and influence in their relations with NATO. Finally, we analyse the foreign and security policy dilemmas of Armenia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and United Arab Emirates (four out of six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)), all of which cooperate with NATO within NATO's Istanbul Cooperation Initiative.

We could not have achieved all of this research without the support of NATO Science for Peace and Security (NATO-SPS), which provided student scholarships for the emerging scholars of our project, travel support for our workshops, and funding for the project administration at the Centre for Small States Studies in Iceland. We also benefited from crucial conference funding and additional graduate assistance funding provided by the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand; the New Zealand Political Studies Association; the Amiya Foundation; the Wigram Foundation; and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

The editors are grateful for the support of their families throughout the life of this project and for the hard work of all the researchers who tried out the project ideas within the various activities we all organised. With finite resources, our project has demonstrated the capacity within small states to pool resources and expertise to come up with proactive policy choices.

We dedicate this book, with admiration and respect, to Alyson J. K. Bailes (1949 Bailes ( -2016 , diplomat, scholar and polyglot, and friend to so many, whose ideas helped to shape thinking in the project.

The current global operating environment is unpredictable and unstable. States face a long transition towards a new global order. Small state governments must be adaptable, resilient, and entrepreneurial in their response to the new security environment. Small states can compensate for their inbuilt vulnerability by adopting strengthening measures such as digital diplomacy, cyber defence, and foreign interference public awareness campaigns. They can partner with other like-minded small and medium states and work to reinforce shared global norms. The new security environment requires governments to be proactive rather than reactive.

Small can be huge. We are indeed at a turning point in global affairs. But with careful actions and proactive thinking, small states can secure their future and strengthen national security and independence.

Easterly and Kraay

Time to Face Reality: Priorities for NATO's 2016 Warsaw Summit

Trade and productivity

Introduction: small states and EU

Small states and international security: Europe and beyond

Instrumentalizing the European Union in small state strategies

The Nordic countries and the European security and defence policy

Scotland as an independent small state: where would it seek shelter?

Alliance theory and small state alliance 'shelter': the complexities of small state alliance behaviour

The power of small states: diplomacy in World War II

The other powers: studies in the foreign policy of small states

Small states and the changing global order: New Zealand faces the future

Small states and status seeking: Norway's quest for higher standing

Small states and new era of public diplomacy: New Zealand and digital diplomacy

The diplomacies of small states: between vulnerability and resilience

All the world is a stage: global governance, human resources, and the 'problem' of smallness

Bounding power: republican security theory from the Polis to the global village

Small states, small problems? Income, growth, and volatility in small states

Taking stock: the constructivist research program in international relations and comparative politics

Does trade cause growth?

New Zealand and the foreign policy of small states

Beyond New Zealand II: foreign policy in the 1990s

Beyond New Zealand: the foreign policy of a small state

Small states in world politics: explaining foreign policy behavior

Small states in international relations

Neo-liberal small states and economic crisis: lessons for democratic corporatism

Corporatism and change: Austria, Switzerland, and the politics of industry

Small states in world markets: industrial policy in Europe

The functions of small states in the strategies of the great powers

Olafsson BG (1998) Small states and the global system: analysis and illustrations from the case of Iceland

Economy, territory, identity: politics of west European peripheries

Economy, territory, identity: politics of west European peripheries

Domestic buffer versus external shelter: viability of small states in the new globalised economy

Small states in the UN Security Council: means of influence?

Iceland's relations with its regional powers: alignment with the EU-US sanctions on Russia

Small state foreign policy

The inequality of states: a study of the small power in international relations

Moral authority and status in international relations: good states and the social dimension of status seeking

Professor Brady is a Global Fellow at the Woodrow Wilson Centre in

Baldur Thorhallsson is a Professor of Political Science and founder of the Centre for Small State Studies at the University of Iceland and NATO Project Director (NPD) of the SSANSE Project. His research focus has primarily been on small state studies, European integration, and Iceland's domestic and foreign policy