Statement of Work

This blog is not a personal blog, nor is it a fan-blog or a political statement. It is simply an attempt by someone no longer offered the luxury of debate and testing of ideas found within academia to present and debate a world view, opinions and ideas, bad and good. Hopefully, some will find this interesting, and it will cause some fruitful discussion, and hopefully some better ideas than those initially brought to the table.

As the title header indicates, it intends to see defence, international relations, politics and security from a distinctly Scandinavian perspective. In order to illustrate this, the blog has taken the name of a Norwegian naval officer, Petter Wessel, later Tordenskiold (1690-1720) who served with the Danish-Norwegian fleet in the great Nordic War of 1700-1721. The choice illustrates the somewhat naval-centric view that probably will manifest itself, as well as the all-Scandinavian perspective it seeks to achieve to the issues it addresses.

Inspiration of a more academic kind comes from primarily two sources: The first is Dr. Thomas P.M. Barnett, author and strategist, who has through his two books, "The Pentagon's New Map" and "Blueprint for Action" laid out a world view that is distinctly different from that which is usually adopted in discussions of international relations. Terms such as "the core" and "the gap", reffering to the core of globalized countries and the central gap of non-integrating countries will regularly be used. Other terms include "Leviathan" and "SysAdmin," which will be adopted to describe the different kind of forces that Dr. Barnett advocates - a Leviathan to fight high intensity wars and a SysAdmin force to expand and maintain "connectivity" using less intensive means.

The second source of inspiration comes from Stephen Biddle and his relentless work to document how the current drive for advanced military technology must be moderated by an understanding of the continued importance of skill, training, organization, and particularly "force employment" in military power. His work proves that it superiority in these later factors more than superior technology that has granted the US and its allies such easy victories in recent conflicts. Though technology certainly helps, it is far from as significant as often believed.

This is not to say that this will be a "fan-site" of any kind. Indeed, though heavily inspired by Dr. Barnett and his ideas, the blog will disagree with some of his opinions, such as his support for the invasion of Iraq. This will often be due to the fact that its perspective is deeply different from that of Barnett, as it sees the world from the point of view of a small Scandinavian country, not the US. Our priorities may differ, though our understanding of the surrounding world may conincide. In fact, rather than agreeing with Barnett, this blog will seek to see what the place of a small state in a system such as the one he describes will be, and how a smaller Scandinavian country should act and organize to best fulfill its role.

Neither will this blog be in any way techno-sceptic nor "luddite" in any way. Rather, it will advocate a more moderate approach to technology, one which will be more in line with the priorities of a small Scandinavian country.

Based on these influences, this blog will make a few basic assumptions that will shape its analysis and understanding:

• Military power can be a force for good in the world - rather than being demonized and marginalized, it should be forged into a more useful tool than it currently is (along the lines of Dr. Barnett's propositions)
• Small states such as Norway, Denmark and even Sweden cannot realistically hope to become "Leviathans" in their own right. Their armed forces should therefore reorganize distinctly towards a structure more suited for SysAdmin work, and in high-intensity combat rely more on highly-skilled small unit operations, exploiting the weakness of major armies who struggle when faced with such operations.
• SysAdmin is not just important in the gap - it needs to be conducted within the territories of the core countries as well, in order to maintain and improve the current level of connectivity.
  
• Highly advanced military equipment needs to better balance cost and capabilities if it is to justify its continued focus. Particularly for smaller states, the immense increase in cost seen in recent years risks trunkating continued development, and eat up funding intended for training and reorganization, effectively reducing their overall combat capabilities.

Others will almost certainly be added as time goes on, though these will remain among the most central contentions. Again, this blog does not intend to allign itself religiously to any of the scholars above, but rather to adapt their ideas and theories, originally written with large powers in mind to a Scandinavian and small state perspective. What is our place in the world, how can be participate, how can we make our contribution a valuable one? These are the themes that hopefulyl will be adressed in the time to come.