Thorsteinn Kristinsson
@stennikr.bsky.social
Footloose academic. Interested in rising powers, relational IR, Liberal International Order, Asian regionalism, small state studies.
📍Taipei, Lund, Reykjavik
Institute of International Affairs, University of Iceland
https://ams.hi.is/en/people/294/
📍Taipei, Lund, Reykjavik
Institute of International Affairs, University of Iceland
https://ams.hi.is/en/people/294/
Yes, that's correct. But governments are determined by majorities in the House of Representatives, so those elections are the defining ones.
June 26, 2025 at 11:18 AM
Yes, that's correct. But governments are determined by majorities in the House of Representatives, so those elections are the defining ones.
This is definitely an improvement on the Westminster system in my view, but it's not a PR system since it still aggregates votes towards two large parties or coalitions.
Voters of smaller parties have their voices heard (via 2nd or 3rd preference) but they don't get seats in parliament like in PR.
Voters of smaller parties have their voices heard (via 2nd or 3rd preference) but they don't get seats in parliament like in PR.
June 26, 2025 at 10:04 AM
This is definitely an improvement on the Westminster system in my view, but it's not a PR system since it still aggregates votes towards two large parties or coalitions.
Voters of smaller parties have their voices heard (via 2nd or 3rd preference) but they don't get seats in parliament like in PR.
Voters of smaller parties have their voices heard (via 2nd or 3rd preference) but they don't get seats in parliament like in PR.
As far as I can tell, the Austrialian system for the house of representatives is a variant on the Westminster system. It has the same single member constituencies, but instead of using FPTP to determine the winner, the votes get transferred around by preference until someone reaches half the votes.
June 26, 2025 at 10:04 AM
As far as I can tell, the Austrialian system for the house of representatives is a variant on the Westminster system. It has the same single member constituencies, but instead of using FPTP to determine the winner, the votes get transferred around by preference until someone reaches half the votes.
It's counterpart is the UK's Westminster system which uses FPTP single member constituencies, which favour large parties allowing them clear majorities with far less than half the vote.
June 26, 2025 at 10:04 AM
It's counterpart is the UK's Westminster system which uses FPTP single member constituencies, which favour large parties allowing them clear majorities with far less than half the vote.
Hey Andrew, thanks for this!
However, what I mean by proportional representation are systems where multiple parties can get seats in parliament proportionally to the share of national votes they receive (like in most of Europe). This is typically achieved by having large multimember constituencies.
However, what I mean by proportional representation are systems where multiple parties can get seats in parliament proportionally to the share of national votes they receive (like in most of Europe). This is typically achieved by having large multimember constituencies.
June 26, 2025 at 10:04 AM
Hey Andrew, thanks for this!
However, what I mean by proportional representation are systems where multiple parties can get seats in parliament proportionally to the share of national votes they receive (like in most of Europe). This is typically achieved by having large multimember constituencies.
However, what I mean by proportional representation are systems where multiple parties can get seats in parliament proportionally to the share of national votes they receive (like in most of Europe). This is typically achieved by having large multimember constituencies.
Definitely better than FPTP.
But I still much prefer our proportional representation parliamentary systems.
But I still much prefer our proportional representation parliamentary systems.
June 25, 2025 at 1:22 PM
Definitely better than FPTP.
But I still much prefer our proportional representation parliamentary systems.
But I still much prefer our proportional representation parliamentary systems.
Brief thread here.
A new piece by me in @thediplomat.com.
I argue that, despite considerable speculation to the contrary, #China will not invade #Taiwan in the near future.
In fact, the Trump administration's trade wars are decreasing that likelihood.
I argue that, despite considerable speculation to the contrary, #China will not invade #Taiwan in the near future.
In fact, the Trump administration's trade wars are decreasing that likelihood.
Why China Will Not Invade Taiwan (For Now)
China has little to gain and everything to lose by altering the world’s current geopolitical trajectory.
thediplomat.com
May 17, 2025 at 8:48 AM
Brief thread here.
Beijing has long dreamed off a more 'multipolar' order for this very reason. It has no reason to create a global crisis just as Trump is delivering it.
May 16, 2025 at 7:08 AM
Beijing has long dreamed off a more 'multipolar' order for this very reason. It has no reason to create a global crisis just as Trump is delivering it.
The belligerence of US foreign policy towards friends and foes alike, is charting a geopolitical trajectory that is highly favourable to China.
By fatally undermining US alliances, the Trump administration has all but ensured that the US will confront China alone in the coming decades.
By fatally undermining US alliances, the Trump administration has all but ensured that the US will confront China alone in the coming decades.
May 16, 2025 at 7:08 AM
The belligerence of US foreign policy towards friends and foes alike, is charting a geopolitical trajectory that is highly favourable to China.
By fatally undermining US alliances, the Trump administration has all but ensured that the US will confront China alone in the coming decades.
By fatally undermining US alliances, the Trump administration has all but ensured that the US will confront China alone in the coming decades.
Always a pleasure :)
March 23, 2025 at 8:18 AM
Always a pleasure :)
They're not really slowing it down. More just sticking with the ambiguous timing they set in their coalition agreement.
The two main governing parties are long time pro-EU parties. They want to avoid being seen as "exploiting" the current situation to scare people and push Iceland in.
The two main governing parties are long time pro-EU parties. They want to avoid being seen as "exploiting" the current situation to scare people and push Iceland in.
March 23, 2025 at 5:46 AM
They're not really slowing it down. More just sticking with the ambiguous timing they set in their coalition agreement.
The two main governing parties are long time pro-EU parties. They want to avoid being seen as "exploiting" the current situation to scare people and push Iceland in.
The two main governing parties are long time pro-EU parties. They want to avoid being seen as "exploiting" the current situation to scare people and push Iceland in.
But yes, I do think that the transatlantic crises - not to mention the threats against Greenland - might end up being the force that tips the scale of popular opinion in Iceland in favour of EU membership.
March 22, 2025 at 1:33 PM
But yes, I do think that the transatlantic crises - not to mention the threats against Greenland - might end up being the force that tips the scale of popular opinion in Iceland in favour of EU membership.