NOVEMBER 12
WARM-UP SESSIONS
Sessions are held under the “Chatham House Rule” and streamed exclusively for participants of the “Rīga Conference”
WARM-UP SESSIONS
Sessions are held under the “Chatham House Rule” and streamed exclusively for participants of the “Rīga Conference”
Riga time (UTC+2)
With the COVID-19 pandemic entering its second wave worldwide, attention has largely focused on the pandemic’s spread and its hoped-for mitigation through an effective and credible vaccine. Climate change and its impact on the Arctic has been mostly relegated to expert analysis with little broader public discussion. Yet, this does not mean that the threat is less serious. The Arctic is a living laboratory of what awaits humanity. Since last year’s discussion of the Arctic at the Riga Conference, the situation has worsened. The panel will explore recent developments and touch upon the climate impact, the increased geopolitical tension, as well as the political and economic developments that turn to the opportunities that a progressively ice-free Arctic offers.
Riga time (UTC+2)
Today, Belarus is sending a powerful message to the international community and reminding it that democracy is still in high demand. The Belarusian society is expressing its support for democratic reforms and regime change. At the same time, it is obvious that the old regime is not going to give up its powerful position and is seeking support from Russia’s political elite. What type of power transition can we expect? What strategies will we see after a transition of power? What policies are to be introduced for the country’s stabilization and growth?
Riga time (UTC+2)
As with a wide variety of issues, the global pandemic has brought attention to the critical importance of security of supply and Allied support in a crisis. In our interconnected world, sudden crisis situations force governments, businesses, and societies to readjust to the new conditions, which affect free movement and deliveries of essential goods and services crucial for the continuity of states and their societies. International cooperation to ensure the security of supply is increasingly important in a broad spectrum of crises – from pandemics and natural disasters to military conflicts and wars. Moreover, the recent pandemic has shown that agreements for rapid reinforcement, both civil and military, should be put in place during peacetime. How can we ensure rapid movement of reinforcements in a time of crisis – essential services, various goods, medical assets, food, and, if necessary, also military personnel and transport?
CONFERENCE
Riga time (UTC+2)
Riga time (UTC+2)
Resilience of the EU has been tested in several crisis over the last decade. What makes the COVID-19 crisis different? Resilience and solidarity have not been “working” under the pressure of the pandemic. Why is that? After the questionable let down to act in a timely and effective manner, the member states demonstrated their commitment to act based on the principle of solidarity and agreed on the multiannual financial framework and the EU recovery fund under the Next Generation EU. Will financial efforts be translated into a comprehensive policy package delivering results from which citizens could benefit in the not too distant future? Does the EU have a comprehensive contingency plan in building up and strengthening the resilience needed to face the next crisis? Will the implementation of those policies demonstrate the willingness of countries to go beyond their differences and national preferences? To what extent will the urgency to deal with COVID-19 impact or even undermine the implementation of ambitious plans for Europe to become more “sustainable, more digital and more unitized”?
Riga time (UTC+2)
2020 has been a year full of various challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic has illuminated the importance of strengthening resilience through civil and military preparedness and collaboration. Initial national and EU responses to the pandemic have been lackluster; countries were pursuing individualistic policies by closing borders, limiting the movement of goods, and competing for vital medical equipment. COVID-19 has already had a negative economic impact and could have further significant consequences for defence budgets.
Despite the pandemic, threats at a global and regional level have not diminished – Russia has continued with large scale military exercises, developing its military capabilities and maintaining an active presence abroad. Additionally, there is unpredictability due to the developments in Belarus. During these turbulent times – what are the necessary steps for both EU and NATO to ensure credibility, solidarity, and strength?
Riga time (UTC+2)
For a long time, a majority of Russian foreign policy experts, government officials and academicians have been convinced that multi-polarity is the basis of any future world order. They call to review established rules of liberal world order and to grant national states a broader role, including the idea of prioritising national laws over international laws. Russia has advanced a foreign and security policy that serves to enhance multi-polarity that is played out economically, politically and militarily in different regions around the world. What is the balance between Russia’s geopolitical interests and its geo-economic interests as drivers of its foreign policy, when viewed by its actions in Syria, Latin America, Africa and Europe? Will Russia’s geopolitical ambitions be implemented through a traditional divide and rule method or will new approaches be elaborated and applied? Will there be novel strategies applied in the regions of Russia’s “privileged and exclusive interests”? What consequences are there for the European neighbourhood?
Riga time (UTC+2)
Riga time (UTC+2)
The Fourth Industrial Revolution is here, reaching far beyond technological developments and future economies. Its speed is exponential, causing deep systemic change in every aspect of human life and societal transformation. Its nature is both – highly creative and disruptive. One example is modern information technologies. They enable the spread of information at such a speed and volume, that it affects national and international economies, politics and security in ways utterly disproportionate with the root realities. An infodemic is a blend of “information” and “epidemic” that typically refers to a rapid, overwhelming and far-reaching spread of both accurate and inaccurate information about an issue. An infodemic could do more harm than a global health crisis. The infodemic has been a factor in implementing a range of COVID-19 pandemic related government policies. What are the tangible consequences of an infodemic in terms of economies, politics and security? Have new technologies influenced our perception and core value systems, for better or worse? How could governments use new technologies to shape discourses for long-term, strategic objectives?
Riga time (UTC+2)
The COVID-19 pandemic is truly a global phenomenon with few countries unscathed. It has come at a time when power in the international state system is shifting to the east, with China asserting a global leadership role in limiting the spread of the contagion, while the U.S. is seemingly relinquishing such a role to focus on itself but, at the same time, finds itself in a power competition with China on economic and technological issues. Will the pandemic become a trend enhancer, strengthening bipolarity while weakening multilateralism? Will this power reconfiguration push countries, including in Europe, to take sides? What patterns will we see in relations between China and the U.S.? Some tend to say that this is the first global crisis in more than a century where Washington was not able to lead by example. Is U.S. leadership declining globally and who is to replace it? Since the pandemic is not a “self-eliminating political problem”, which political actors will undertake the role of leadership? Will it be China? Will the reshaping of the global order or anarchy influence regional architectures? Will the next decade be an era balancing threats, partnerships and competitors? What are the global economic consequences of the U.S. and China opting to either have active engagement in global affairs or a refocus on domestic affairs?
Riga time (UTC+2)
The relevance of NATO is a recurring topic of contention among the Allies with the issue of budgetary commitments in dispute. As Europeans respond with a focus on ‘independence’ and ‘strategic autonomy’, one is reminded of the warning made by Madelaine Albright in 1998 – no de-linking CSDP from NATO, no duplication of efforts, no discrimination against non-EU members. Will these efforts result in a division of labour, and if so, what will comprise the EU-NATO cooperation agenda? Will Europe grow stronger if some NATO responsibilities are taken over by the EU? National political agendas on both sides of the Atlantic are driven by the tackling of the emergency health situation. Will countries be able to keep up with given promises to raise defence spending and proceed with expensive defence reforms under the pressure of the pandemic? What is the likely outcome of NATO’s reflection process and the EU’s search for its Strategic Compass?
Riga time (UTC+2)
The United Nations underpins the international order that we have known since 1945. Is the multilateral, rules-based approach still the key to tackling global issues? How do we maintain and strengthen multilateralism in a rapidly changing world?