ABSTRACT After joining the EU and NATO, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe transitioned to professional armed forces. They anticipated membership benefits without making adequate defence contributions. The war in Ukraine, renewed Russian military buildup, and the US focus shifting away from Europe have made reforms urgent. Europe must prioritise building a unified defence strategy and increasing its strategic autonomy, engaging effectively with both allies and competitors. Modernising all-volunteer forces should be the first step. Romania and Poland are central to these efforts. Improving their joint defence capabilities is vital for Europe’s security. Currently, aggregated national data reveal inconsistencies in recruitment patterns. Generational differences persist in attitudes towards public service, especially concerning the military draft. To fill this gap, this research complements national surveys with focus groups and interviews at the meso level. It examines recruitment-related factors within a sample of Romanian individuals of pre-recruitment age. Respondents ranked conscription below voluntary and reserve service. A two-phase qualitative process introduced incentive-based enlistment scenarios. About two in ten would consider voluntary enlistment under better conditions. The findings suggest that a hybrid voluntary-mandatory system could improve recruitment and retention. The article recommends expanding recruitment, boosting retention and preserving the option to reintroduce conscription.

ABSTRACT The European Commission (EC) seeks to position the EU as a global leader in the energy transition by enhancing its geopolitical influence and reducing its dependence on fossil fuels. This paper analyses the EC’s narratives on energy transition and decarbonisation in relation to the EU’s emerging geopolitical actorness. Drawing on a critical geopolitical perspective, it shows how speeches by EC representatives strategically deploy narratives to construct the EU’s identity as a leading global actor in energy transition governance, one that integrates the roles of a competitive economic power, a normative power and a geopolitical power. Furthermore, this paper illustrates that the EC simultaneously reimagines the geopolitical configuration of its energy relations by redefining its international partnerships and dependencies. In doing so, the EC reinforces the EU’s self-image as a centre of values projected onto the energy transition, even though this value framework is applied selectively.

ABSTRACT For decades, European Union (EU) Member States have promoted openness and collaboration in science. However, amidst a changing geopolitical world order, they increasingly view international research collaborations as a possible gateway for foreign interference. As a result, several Member States have tightened international research collaborations through “research security” measures like visa restrictions for foreign researchers. So far, the implementation of these measures remains under-researched. We address this blind spot by using the narrative policy framework as a theoretical lens to investigate how the implementation of research security policies is narrated across the micro- (individual), meso- (organisational) and macro- (governmental) levels in Germany. Based on a mixed-methods analysis, we show that there are currently few linkages between policy narratives across governance levels. This narrative inconsistency creates uncertainties for micro-level actors that are tasked with policy implementation, thus endangering policy effectiveness. Conceptually, our study introduces critical nuances that help refine our understanding of how policy narratives evolve. Specifically, it demonstrates that rather than being implemented in a linear way from design to execution, research security narratives are created in a space of narrative autonomy in terms of sentiments, terminology and suggestions for implementation.

ABSTRACT This article analyses the evolution of Spain’s defence planning between the democratic transition and the institutionalisation of capability-based planning (CBP) in 2005. It argues that, even as Spain procedurally converged with the NATO model, persistent domestic constraints – reactive strategic culture, shallow civilian engagement, fragile civil–military relations and chronic budgetary improvisation – produced a structural strategy – capabilities mismatch. Using a neoclassical-realist lens, the article shows how systemic pressures were refracted through domestic filters that diluted coherence and hindered capability development. The analysis traces three phases: (1) foundational reforms (1977–1984); (2) institutional consolidation under fiscal constraint (1984–1994) and (3) the shift towards CBP (1994–2005), culminating in the 2003 Strategic Defence Review and Ministerial Order 37/2005. Spain’s case demonstrates that planning innovations can align national procedures with allied frameworks but cannot substitute for sustained political leadership, institutional integration and predictable funding.

ABSTRACT Prominent examples of withdrawal from international organisations (IOs) raise the question of how actors seek to validate their role after exit. IOs may seek legitimation either through the exclusion of the departing state or continued engagement in their activities, while departing states may validate withdrawal through continued engagement or the denial of recognition. This article claims legitimation strategies are shaped by the policy domain, with external differentiation, institutional overlap and contingent actorness making IOs more susceptible to recognition denial and thus more likely to seek continued engagement. The article provides empirical evidence for this claim through the UK–EU security relationship post-Brexit, drawing on interviews with both sides. We show how Britain’s potential contribution to EU security underscored a desire to keep Britain involved, but that politicisation in the UK led the Johnson government to pursue a deliberate strategy of recognition denial. Our findings help explain why actors seek different legitimation strategies after withdrawal.

ABSTRACT This article advances the concept of retrospective securitisation as a refinement of securitisation theory, with a particular focus on the role of narrative and its temporal dynamics. Using the 2007 cyberattacks on Estonia as a case study, it examines how these events – initially framed as isolated cyber incidents – were later reinterpreted through the hybrid threat framework in light of Russia’s post-2014 strategic conduct. The article analyses how past events are retrospectively integrated into evolving security discourses, revealing how securitising narratives shift over time to accommodate new threat perceptions. It introduces two scenarios for conceptualisation of retrospective securitisation. It highlights why political actors prefer to securitise the events retrospectively and the active role played by academia and the media in co-constructing and amplifying these narratives. Furthermore, the study situates this narrative reclassification within NATO’s strategic evolution, demonstrating how hybrid threats have become central to its cybersecurity and deterrence agenda. By tracing how historical incidents are reframed to align with emergent threat categories, the article offers new insights into the narrative construction of security and contributes to theoretical debates within International Security Studies and International Relations.

ABSTRACT This paper investigates why EU member states have largely opted for external forums, rather than the EU itself, to shape the emerging governance of military AI. While the EU’s limited competence in security and defence is often cited as the primary constraint, its robust support for Ukraine following Russia’s 2022 invasion or past involvement in other arms control forums challenge the idea that institutional limitations are insurmountable. Drawing on the concept of forum shopping, we introduce a two-dimensional analytical framework focused on institutional bindingness (ranging from soft principles to binding rules) and stakeholder engagement (from state-centric to transnational formats). We apply this framework to four key EU member states (Austria, France, Germany and the Netherlands) and assess their preferences across four institutional venues: the EU, the United Nations, the Political Declaration, and REAIM, covering the period 2019–2024. Our analysis reveals that, despite divergent policy preferences, these states converge around flexible, plurilateral forums that better match their strategic and procedural goals, leaving the EU marginalised not by default, but by design.

ABSTRACT Despite extensive research on public opinion, the factors influencing attitudes towards wartime solidarity between allied nations remain underexplored, especially at the citizen level. Existing literature mainly focuses on state-level solidarity, neglecting the importance of public support. This is particularly relevant within NATO, where collective defence relies on both member states’ actions and citizens’ willingness to support allies in need. Traditional international relations theories emphasise state and elite actions, overlooking the role of public opinion. Public support is critical, especially for military aid, as it involves taxpayer money in democratic states. This article explores the factors driving citizens’ willingness to assist an allied NATO country during wartime, with a focus on sense of belonging to Europe. Using cross-sectional survey data from Finland, a recent NATO member, the study examines how these emotional ties influence the willingness to provide military support. The findings contribute to public opinion, security policy, and security studies, shedding light on the mechanisms behind solidarity among NATO allies and Western democracies and public support for military aid.

ABSTRACT In societal security, cross-sector cooperation is commonly described as a temporary response to extraordinary circumstances, where each organisation acts within its sector to address a shared, sector-spanning problem. However, many critical infrastructures and societal functions are sustained by permanent cooperation under ordinary circumstances, and organisations frequently operate beyond their sector boundaries. Yet, there are no analytic frameworks that address this variety in modes of cooperation. This perpetuates a limited scope, present in both practical coordination of and research on societal security. This article’s main objective is to develop an analytic framework that contributes to a better understanding of the diversity in interorganisational cross-sector cooperation in a societal security context. The framework draws on systems theory and interorganisational relationship studies, applying the “boundary” concept to highlight distinguishing features of various modes of cooperation. The features are explored in relation to the societal security problem, the interorganisational activity and the societal security system-of-systems. The framework’s applicability is tested in two cases of interorganisational cooperation in the geopolitically significant Svalbard archipelago. We identify three dimensions that distinguish between modes of cooperation: the extraordinariness of the problem, the duration of cooperation, and whether the contribution is within or outside the actors’ sector.

ABSTRACT In recent years, the use of drones in warfare has ignited intense discussions regarding their potentially revolutionary effects on warfare and international security. Media headlines tend to narrate drones’ impact as “game-changing” and “revolutionary”, while some scholars and experts call for caution with such characterisations warning against hype. Is there a notable gap between experts and journalists in understanding the implications of drone warfare, suggestive of potential technology hype? I attempt to answer this question through surveys distributed to unique samples of experts and journalists within the defense, military, and international security realms. I found that journalists are more prone to favour claims portraying the effect of drones as revolutionary and disruptive than experts. However, the results also revealed a lack of expert consensus on the implications of drone warfare, a more nuanced picture than a straightforward expert-media divergence.