For two years now the war in Southeast Ukraine has claimed approximately 10,000 lives and countless casualties. Pegged as a civil war, the conflict is waging on between pro-Western nationalists and pro-Russian separatists. The war ignited after the public ousting of President Yanukovch in Maidan Square in the midst of thousands of protesters, and the subsequent annexation of Crimea. Although the Russian Federation maintains it does not have a military presence in Ukraine, U.S. intelligence and Ukrainian military officials have evidence otherwise. As a result, the West has imposed significant sanctions on “Putin's Russia”. This study explores how Putin justifies the Russian incursion into Ukraine through his own rhetoric, and further, whether this rhetoric changes when speaking to a domestic versus international audience. In the context of framing, this study analyzes 57 speeches, interviews, and excerpts of Vladimir Putin focused on the Crisis in Ukraine, from the years of 2013 to 2016. Throughout the literature, Kin-state rallying, Russian encirclement by enemies/isolation, Russian ethnocentrism, blurred legal rhetoric, and manipulation of historical myth, are the predominant frames that emerge. By way of propaganda, the findings indicate that Putin's most frequently used justifications frame the conflict through Russia's necessity to protect its brother nation from an unstable government, and the projection of blame onto the West. In effect, this study not only emphasizes the significance and implications of framing by elites in conflict, it also sheds light on the current debate over Putin's motivations in Ukraine. / McAnulty College and Graduate School of Liberal Arts; / Graduate Center for Social and Public Policy / MA; / Thesis;

No

The need for reliable financial information has led to the establishment of audits as a vital component of corporate governance. Audits serve to enhance the credibility of financial statements, mitigate agency conflicts, and instill trust among stakeholders. In an evolving business landscape, external factors such as covid, war, and climate change have emerged, potentially impacting the determinants of audit fees. Purpose: The main objective of this thesis is to investigate the influence of external risk factors such as the covid pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change on audit fees. Theoretical perspectives: Theoretical concepts base on previous research and publications on determinants of audit fees, audit risk, the covid pandemic, Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change. Literature was used to derive the research gap and research questions. Methodology: A qualitative method base exploratory approach. A literature review was conducted to uncover areas of interest that require more research. The influence of external risk on the audit fees was identified as a potential area for research; a focus on the covid pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change. The research is based on semi-structured interviews with auditors from big four audit firms in Sweden. Empirical foundation: Six auditors from various professional levels participated in the interview process to obtain empirical data. Conclusions: The findings of the study show that covid, Russia-Ukraine war, and climate change have significant implications on audit fees. These external factors contribute to increased complexity and risk in the audit process, necessitating additional resources and effort leading to increase in audit fees. Recognizing the influence of COVID-19, war, and climate change on audit fees is crucial for auditors, audit clients, policymakers, and regulators. This awareness can inform decision-making processes, financial planning, risk assessments, and the development of appropriate regulatory frameworks, ultimately promoting transparency and strengthening the overall integrity of the audit process. The findings contribute to the existing body of knowledge and serve as a foundation for further exploration and understanding of the complex relationship between these external factors and audit fees.

This thesis presents a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of comments about the Russo- Ukraine war on Facebook and Instagram from February 2022 until March 2023 and points out topics that are dominantly discussed and stereotypes that are used in connection to the war. For this, critical discourse analysis (CDA) was employed as analytical framework and method (Fairclough, 2010). Related concepts were taken into consideration such as ideology, power and hegemony (Gramsci, 1971) as well as Lippmann’s theory of stereotypes (1922). Furthermore, the users’ emotional connection to topics and stereotypes was established by conducting a sentiment analysis with the help of a word-emotion association lexicon (Mohammad & Turney, 2011). This lexicon was elaborated in the process of analysis: Irony as a new category emerged. Results suggest that online users judge individuals and groups of people, such as refugees and whole nations in predictable, simple, often negative categories or stereotypes as Lippmann (1922) described it over a hundred years ago. Whereas users express solidarity and love towards Ukrainians who stay in the country and fight bravely against the aggressor Russia at the beginning of the war, negative views are expressed towards Ukraine refugees and refugees in general who flee to Europe. Furthermore, Russophobic comments can be found and the current war situation is compared to the Second World War. Thereby, users make use of irony in comments about dystopian scenarios such as facing a possible Third World War with nuclear strikes. Those results are critically discussed in connection to nationalist and populist ideologies.

Since the end of the Cold War, security and security threats have transcended beyond the traditional security aspects due to changed global interactions in the facets of economic, political, diplomatic and even domestic policies of individual states. The ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has not only heightened defence and security concerns in Europe and globally but has also revived the Cold War security tensions in some way necessitating an understanding of how contemporary security threats and crisis preparedness are perceived by civilians in this modern day and age.  Building from Ontological Security theory which holds that when an individual's sense of self and stability is challenged, they experience enormous anxiety, this study examines the attitudes and perceptions of the youths (many of whom were born and raised in the post-Cold War era) on security threats as well as their knowledge and trust in the government's civil defence and crisis preparedness in Växjö, Sweden. The study's analysis concludes that, despite being barely informed on civil defence crisis preparedness, Växjö's youths regard the ongoing war in Ukraine as less threatening to their ontological security but rather other human security issues due to factors like the war's narrative bearing little relevance, youth's media scepticism and refraining from negative news. Furthermore, the findings present a dramatic range of trust among the youths in the government's competence to handle emergencies, reflecting on crisis preparedness knowledge among the youths in Växjö.

On the 24th of February Russia invaded Ukraine from multiple directions, causing a sudden influx of Ukrainians fleeing the country to the EU territories to be safe from the war. The reactions from the neighboring countries were uncharacteristically welcoming and humanitarian aid was promptly delivered to the ones in need. This creates a contrast to the refugees coming from outside Europe and their treatment. This thesis utilizes a three-dimensional Critical Discourse Analysis to examine the discourse on Ukrainian refugees in Deutsche Welle and Aljazeera in the days following the start of the invasion. Poststructural theory of power and identity constructions is employed to uncover hidden assumptions and knowledge production in the discourse. I argue that the notions of Eurocentrism and Eurocentric views on identities are prevailing in the discourse and that this emphasis on Europe as the in-group deepens the divide between the out-group.

This master's thesis examines the importance of the explosion incident at Nord Stream and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on Sweden’s security sectors. The critical energy project Nord Stream 1 and its expansion to Nord Stream 2 have created bipolar attitudes and debates in Sweden and the EU regarding the security implications of increased Russian power. The Ukraine war and the physical attack on the pipelines have only amplified security concerns in the international political arena. This thesis aims to provide a descriptive understanding of the explosion incident and Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine and their resulting impact on Sweden’s ability to establish a stable security strategy viewed by security sectors such as national-, environmental-, energy-, military-, economic-, human-, and societal-security. Additionally, this thesis also explores these issues from Sweden’s perspective with the use of classic international relations perspectives such as realism and liberalism. Results present that the security sector reports heightened tensions, with Russia potentially increasing military activities. New intensified threat perception for Sweden, negative environmental impacts, affecting on human health and security. Effects regarding energy security. New security threats for Russia's establishment within the European market, impact and effects on nations' identity and uncertainty about the new political situation, and increased insecurity for essential societal infrastructures.

Användningen av cyberattacker mot organisationer, sjukvård och individer har ökat parallellt med digitaliseringen. Nationer har också blivit offer för dessa typer av attacker, som ofta kombineras med andra medel för krigföring såsom markanfall och missilattacker. En Cyber-Pearl Harbor (härefter förkortad CPH) är en term uppmärksammad av Leon Panetta som enligt honom består av kombinerade attacker som resulterar i mänsklig död, fysisk förstörelse och som lamslår en hel nation. Gazmend Huskaj använder sig av Panettas definition för utformande av ett ramverk (“DSLP-ramverket”) som är tänkt användas för att kunna klassificera en händelse som en CPH. Syftet med denna studie är att utforska om DSLP-ramverket kan valideras då termen har brukats de senaste 25 åren utan att en global definition tagit fäste, det är därför inte säkert att de kriterier som presenteras i ramverket överensstämmer med vad cybersäkerhetsexperter anser att en CPH är. Forskningsfrågan som utvecklades från denna studie blev följande: “Hur kan ramverket "DSLP-ramverk" från "Offensive Cyberspace Operations Targeting Ukraine: a Cyber Pearl-Harbor" (2023) valideras för klassificering av cyberattacker som Cyber Pearl-Harbor?”. En kvalitativ fallstudie genomfördes med en litteraturöversikt över termen CPH samt en semistrukturerad intervju där 3 experter utfrågades, vilket sedan analyserades via en tematisk analys. Som ett första steg för att besvara denna studies frågeställning applicerades ramverket på tre verkliga fall, detta för att avgöra huruvida dessa fall kan klassificeras som en CPH eller inte. Dessa tre verkliga fall var en attack mot en publik sjukvårdssektor i Costa Rica, ett TV-torn i Kiev, Ukraina samt dagligvarukedjan Coop i Sverige. Resultatet av valideringen av DSLP-ramverket var att endast fallet med TV-kornet i Kiev, Ukraina kunde klassificeras som en CPH. Den kognitiva effekten av eventet var dock inte förlamande nog att paralysera hela Ukraina, vilket gör klassificeringen diskutabel. Det andra steget bestod av en tematisk analys som gjordes på de tre experterna, vilket resulterade i skapandet av fyra huvudteman: Begreppets betydelse, Försvar mot Cyber-Pearl Harbor, Probabilitet och Kombinerade anfall. Följande slutsatser kom att dras i denna studie: Avsaknaden av en internationell/global standard gör det svårare att 1) göra upp om en gemensam definition av termen samt 2) klassificera en CPH i verklig kontext. Kombinationer av flera attacker och verktyg är en annan aspekt som understryks vid definiering av en CPH. Huruvida en CPH har skett eller inte varierar från expert till expert, och detsamma gäller probabiliteten för att en CPH kan ske i dagens kontext. Baserat på dessa slutsatser blir det svårt att validera DSLP-ramverket. Ytterligare forskning och data, intervjuer med experter och förtydligande behövs för att skapa en universell definition och därmed en gemensam grund att utgå ifrån. / The use of cyberattacks against organizations, health care and individuals have increased along with the constant digitalisation. Nations have also fallen victim to cyberattacks, often combined with other means of war like boots on the ground or missiles. A Cyber-Pearl Harbor (further shortened as CPH) is a term mentioned by Leon Panetta described in his words as “combined attacks that result in human death and physical destruction and that paralyzes an entire nation”. Gazmend Huskaj used Panettas definition in order to create a framework (“DSLP-framework”) for classifying an event as a CPH. This study strives to see if the DSLP-framework can be validated since the term has been widely used for the last 25 years, however a universal definition of the term seems to be missing, therefore it is not certain that the criterias presented in the framework is accurate to what cybersecurity experts consider a CPH to be. The research question developed from this study's problem became the following: “How can the framework “DSLP-Framework” from “Offensive Cyberspace Operations Targeting Ukraine: a Cyber Pearl-Harbor” (2023) be validated for classification of cyberattacks as Cyber Pearl-Harbor?”. A qualitative case study was conducted through a literature overview regarding the term CPH and a semistructured interview with three experts, which were later analyzed through a thematic analysis. As a first step to answering the research question, the framework was applied to three real life cases in order to determine whether or not they can be classified as a CPH. The following cases were an attack on a public health sector in Costa Rica, a TV-tower in Kyiv, Ukraine and the grocery company Coop in Sweden. The result from applying each case to the DSLP-framework was that only the case of the TV-tower in Kyiv could be classified as a CPH. However, the cognitive effects of the event were not crippling enough to paralyze the entirety of Ukraine, making the classification debatable. The second step was done through the use of thematic analysis on the interviews with the experts, in which four main themes were created: The meaning of the concept, Defense against Cyber-Pearl Harbor, Probability and Combined attacks. The following conclusions were drawn in this study: The absence of an international standard makes it harder to 1) conclude a common definition of the term and 2) classify a CPH in real context. The combinations of attacks and tools is another important aspect to highlight when defining a CPH. Whether a CPH has happened or not varies from expert to expert, and the same goes for the probability of a CPH occurring in today's context. Based on these conclusions, it is hard to validate the DSLP-framework. Further research and data, interviews with experts and clarification is needed in order to create a universal definition and therefore a common ground to start from.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has affected millions of people in different ways. The everyday lives of Russians has changed significantly. Our purpose in this study is to explore the experiences of Russian immigrants in Sweden. The areas we are specifically interested in are the understanding individuals have of the conflict and the experiences these individuals describe when it comes to how the conflict has affected their sense of identity as well as their personal relationships with friends and family. This qualitiative study was conducted through interviews of these Russian immigrants. The perspective from the Russian diaspora is a rather unexplored one compared to their Ukrainian counterpart. This study covers many different subjects and there is a lack of previous research on this specific topic, likely because of the recency of these events. Considering this, the section on previous research is based on the themes the study discusses. These themes are public opinion of international military interventions, the Russian diaspora, empathy in polarized politics, shame, and group responsibility, and finally the group borders in the Ukrainian solidarity movement. The theoretical framework this study is based on is emotional sociology. A theory has been built out of the combined viewpoints of Goffman’s theory on categorization and stigma, Collins’s theory of group solidarity, interaction ritual, and conflict talk, Hochschild’s theory of deep stories and empathy walls as well as Scheff’s theory on shame and conformity. The final results of the study show that the understanding of the conflict varies wildly between individuals and said understanding tends to affect in which manner the conflict has changed the sense of identity as well as personal relationships. The individuals who share an understanding that agrees with the idea that Russia is at fault tend to feel a larger sense of shame over their identity and it has had a more negative effect on their personal relationships especially with family in Russia. Individuals who are more inclined to either have a more ambivalent- or pro-Putin understanding didn’t express these experiences but instead had different worries, such as receiving negative sanctions for their opinions. Respondents of all understandings expressed a worry about suffering sanctions for their ethnicity, but none of them described personal experiences with this in Sweden. / Den ryska invasionen av Ukraina har påverkat miljontals människor på olika sätt. Ryssars vardagliga liv har förändrats ordentligt av detta. Vårt syfte i denna studie är att undersöka ryska invandrare i Sverige och deras olika upplevelser. De områden vi är specifikt intresserade av är förståelsen individer har av konflikten och de upplevelser de beskriver angående hur konflikten har påverkat deras identitet och relationer till vänner och familj. Denna kvalitativa studie genomfördes genom intervjuer av dessa ryssar. Den ryska diasporans perspektiv är ett relativt outforskat område i jämförelse med den ukrainska motsvarigheten. Denna studie täcker många olika ämnen och det finns en brist på tidigare forskning på specifikt detta ämne, troligtvis på grund av hur aktuell situationen fortfarande är. Med tanke på detta är sektionen med tidigare forskning baserad på de teman som studien diskuterar. Dessa teman är den allmänna opinionen angående internationella militära interventioner, den ryska diasporan, empati i polariserad politik, skam och gruppansvar och slutligen gruppgränser inom den ukrainska solidaritetsrörelsen. Den teoretiska referensramen vi utgått från är baserad på emotionssociologi. En teori har blivit byggd av de gemensamma synpunkterna av Goffmans teori om kategorisering och stigma, Collins teori om gruppsolidaritet, interatktionsritualer och konfliktsamtal, Hochschilds teori om deep story och empatimurar samt Scheffs teori om skam och konformitet. Resultaten av studien visar att förståelsen av konflikten varierar stort mellan individer och detta tenderar att påverka hur konflikten har förändrat deras identitet och relationer. Individer som delar en förståelse som stämmer överens med idén att konflikten är Rysslands fel tenderar att känna mer skam över deras identitet och det har haft en större negativ påverkan på deras relationer, framförallt med familj i Ryssland. Individer som är mer benägna att antingen ha en mer ambivalent- eller pro-Putinförståelse utryckte inte dessa upplevelser utan andra saker oroade dem, som att lida negativa sociala sanktioner för deras åsikter. Respondenter från alla olika former av förståelse utryckte en oro över att få lida sanktioner på grund av deras etnicitet, men ingen beskrev några personliga erfarenheter av detta i Sverige.

This thesis studies how securitization differs between the war in Ukraine and the war in Syria. It does so by comparing conclusions, statements and speeches published by the European Council in order to understand the perceived differences in crisis management according to their initial reactions. The aim is thus to compare the two crises to understand the European Union's different crisis management. Furthermore, this study uses a discursive analysis to investigate the European Council's reactions through securitization theory, which identifies how a political issue becomes a security threat. The findings suggest that the two crises illustrate different perceptions of the security threat and what to protect, highlighted in the diverse management. In turn, this means that the crises have been securitized differently, and the results have contributed to providing an explanation of the different management and understanding of the crises. Future research is encouraged regarding the effects of securitization and further exploring how the cases' differences affect the results to understand the two crises better.