AAU Student Projects is unavailable between June 15th 1.30pm and 17th 1.30pm due to planned system maintenance. The projects cannot be downloaded during this period.
AAU Student Projects - visit Aalborg University's student projects portal
A master's thesis from Aalborg University
Book cover


Maritime security in a time of geopolitical disruption: How global conflicts shape Danish maritime security governance

Author

Term

4. semester

Publication year

2026

Submitted on

Pages

70

Abstract

This thesis investigates how global conflicts and geopolitical disruption have changed Denmark’s maritime security governance from 2022 to April 2026. Maritime security governance is the mix of rules, practices, and partnerships used to keep shipping, ports, and critical sea infrastructure safe. The study finds that disruption has widened this field, made it more sensitive to security risks, shifted attention toward preparedness and resilience, and increased reliance on international coordination and public–private cooperation. Methodologically, the thesis is an abductive, qualitative single‑country case study of Denmark. Abductive here means the analysis moved back and forth between data and theory. Denmark is a small state with a large maritime sector and strategically important sea lanes, which makes it a relevant case. The analysis draws on Bueger’s maritime security matrix and on Bueger and Edmunds’ view of maritime security as a broad, practice‑based governance field, including their suggestion that geopolitics may be “returning to the sea.” These perspectives allow the study to see maritime security not as a fixed topic, but as an overlapping set of concerns spanning shipping, safety, infrastructure, energy, legal order, commercial flows, resilience, and national security. The empirical material consists of two key‑informant interviews (the Head of Security at Danish Shipping and the Danish Ambassador and Special Representative for Maritime Security) and a thematic analysis of public documents, press releases, strategies, industry materials, and official statements. Using these sources enabled triangulation. Findings show that the threat picture has broadened well beyond earlier concerns with piracy. Conflicts around the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz have directly disrupted commercial shipping, causing rerouting, delays, and logistical challenges. These disruptions feed back into Denmark through higher costs and longer routes, affecting security of supply, energy security, and market predictability. In the Baltic Sea, threats are more indirect and relate to strategic vulnerabilities in and around Danish waters. So‑called grey‑zone threats include sabotage of maritime infrastructure, shadow‑fleet activity, cyberattacks, and manipulation or interference with GNSS (satellite navigation) and AIS (ship‑tracking) systems. While these do not always threaten individual ships or freedom of navigation directly, they expose weak points and have prompted stronger surveillance, monitoring, preparedness, and protection of Denmark’s near waters and critical maritime infrastructure. Overall, the maritime threat environment has become more interconnected, with shocks in one area rippling quickly into others. In response, Danish maritime security governance has become more layered and adaptive. Authorities and industry increasingly rely on strategies, monitoring, information‑sharing, cyber tools, diplomatic networks, international cooperation, naval deployments, total‑defence planning, and closer day‑to‑day coordination between public bodies and the maritime sector. Governance is thus organized around practical tools and routines, and around continuous coordination across sectors and levels. Finally, the study shows that governance increasingly involves trade‑offs: stronger security measures must be balanced against escalation risks, limited capacities, legal restraint, the need to keep commerce moving, freedom of navigation, and Denmark’s broader interest in a rules‑based maritime order. Geopolitics have returned to the sea in the form of conflict and disruption, but Denmark’s response is not purely state‑centred or militarized. Military tools such as naval operations still matter, yet they sit alongside cooperation, coordination, multilateralism, legal restraint, and public–private dialogue. The Danish case therefore supports collaborative, cross‑sector governance as the right way to meet the new threat environment.

Denne afhandling undersøger, hvordan globale konflikter og geopolitiske forstyrrelser har ændret dansk maritim sikkerhedsstyring fra 2022 til april 2026. Maritim sikkerhedsstyring forstås her som de regler, praksisser og partnerskaber, der skal holde skibsfart, havne og kritisk infrastruktur til søs sikre. Resultatet er, at feltet er blevet bredere, mere sikkerhedsfølsomt, mere rettet mod beredskab og robusthed og mere afhængigt af international koordinering og offentlig‑privat samarbejde. Metodisk er afhandlingen et abduktivt, kvalitativt casestudie af ét land (Danmark). Abduktivt betyder, at analysen pendlede mellem data og teori. Danmark er et lille land med en stor maritim sektor og strategisk vigtige sejlruter og er derfor et relevant case. Teoretisk trækker studiet på Buegers maritime sikkerhedsmatrix og på Bueger og Edmunds’ forståelse af maritim sikkerhed som et bredt, praksisbaseret styringsfelt, herunder deres pointe om, at geopolitikken kan være “vendt tilbage til havet”. Dette gør det muligt at se maritim sikkerhed ikke som et fast afgrænset emne, men som et overlap mellem skibsfart, sikkerhed til søs, infrastruktur, energi, retsorden, handelsstrømme, robusthed og national sikkerhed. Det empiriske grundlag omfatter to nøgleinterviews (sikkerhedschefen i Danske Rederier og Danmarks ambassadør og særlige repræsentant for maritim sikkerhed) samt tematisk analyse af offentlige dokumenter, pressemeddelelser, strategier, branchens materialer og officielle udtalelser. Kombinationen muliggør triangulering. Fundene viser, at trusselsbilledet er blevet markant bredere end den tidligere fokus på pirateri. Konflikterne ved Rødehavet og Hormuzstrædet har direkte forstyrret skibsfarten med omsejlinger, forsinkelser og logistiske udfordringer. Det påvirker Danmark gennem længere ruter og højere omkostninger, hvilket har betydning for forsyningssikkerhed, energisikkerhed og markedsforudsigelighed. I Østersøen er truslerne mere indirekte og knytter sig til strategiske sårbarheder i og omkring danske farvande. Såkaldte gråzonetrusler omfatter sabotage mod maritim infrastruktur, skyggeflåde‑aktivitet, cyberangreb samt manipulation eller forstyrrelse af GNSS (satellitnavigationssystemer) og AIS (skibenes identifikations- og sporingssystem). Disse trusler rammer ikke altid det enkelte skib eller den frie sejlads direkte, men de blotlægger svagheder og har ført til styrket overvågning, monitorering, beredskab og beskyttelse af danske nærområder og kritisk maritim infrastruktur. Samlet set er det maritime trusselsmiljø blevet mere sammenvævet, så forstyrrelser ét sted hurtigt påvirker mange andre. Som svar herpå er den danske styring blevet mere lagdelt og adaptiv. Myndigheder og erhverv trækker i stigende grad på strategier, overvågning, informationsdeling, cyberværktøjer, diplomatiske netværk, internationalt samarbejde, flådeindsættelser, totalforsvarsplanlægning og tættere daglig koordination mellem myndigheder og det maritime erhverv. Styringen organiseres i højere grad omkring konkrete værktøjer og praksisser og omkring løbende koordinering på tværs af sektorer og niveauer. Endelig viser analysen, at styringen i stigende grad indebærer afvejninger: skærpede sikkerhedstiltag skal balanceres mod eskalationsrisici, kapacitetsgrænser, juridiske hensyn, fortsatte handelsstrømme, fri sejlads og Danmarks interesse i at opretholde en regelbaseret maritim orden. Geopolitikken er vendt tilbage til havet i form af konflikt og forstyrrelse, men Danmarks svar er ikke blevet rent statsligt eller militariseret. Militære værktøjer som flådeoperationer betyder fortsat noget, men de går hånd i hånd med samarbejde, koordinering, multilateralisme, juridisk tilbageholdenhed og offentlig‑privat dialog. Den danske case peger derfor på, at styrket, tværsektorielt samarbejde er den hensigtsmæssige vej i det nye trusselsmiljø.

[This apstract has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]