Suchergebnisse

In a critical review of the work of E. H. Carr on international politics, Carr's stature as an early critic of Western-Soviet relations is discussed. Carr, best known for his works What Is History? (1962) & The Twenty Years' Crisis (1939), had good timing: eg, his analysis of the failure of policy toward the Central Powers & the USSR appeared on the eve of WWII. Carr was a pioneering figure in that he served both as influential historian & influential policymaker in the British Foreign Office during this period, & his assessment of realism & utopianism, while critiqued in the intervening years, is part of a body of work that still holds value today, particularly for students of international politics. 9 References. A. Siegel

Provides a portrait of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) that turned 50 years in 2009. Even if the institute started from a relatively restricted research perspective on the East-West relations, it has grown to include a large variety of areas from development to security policy. The institute has a legal status, official control, organizational essence and its main task is to enlighten international relation. Despite its institutional status, the research conducted by NUPI is distinguished from both academic basic research and user-oriented consulting solutions. What really distinguishes NUPI, however, is its status as the only research institute that focuses on foreign policy and international relations that are of Norwegian interest and produced in the Norwegian language. L. Pitkaniemi

Established in 1937, the Norwegian journal Internasjonal politikk (IP) came about as an important part of efforts to establish International Relations as a field of study in Norway. Elsewhere, interest in the field was already evident in the aftermath of the First World War. In response to an approach by the Institute of Intellectual Cooperation in Paris towards members of the Norwegian academic community, a committee for the pursuit of the study of International Relations in Norway was formed in 1936, headed by Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Christian Lous Lange of Norway. From 1937 on, the publication of a Norwegian-language journal of International Relations became a major focus of the work of the committee. Its profile was established in the first issue: the journal was to be "impartial, objective and written in a popular form". Arne Ording, a historian and leading architect of Norway's Second World War and post-war foreign policy, was to be the first editor of Internasjonal Politikk. In 1960, the journal was transferred to the newly established Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI). Here it became part of the institute's strategy for research on International Relations in general and Norwegian foreign policy in particular, and as an important part of this, research-based public information. Since Internasjonal politikk was not published during the five years of Nazi occupation, it turns 70 in the year of its 65th volume. Adapted from the source document.

This article summarizes and draws conclusions from a series of articles on the topic of empires. The article emphasizes the need to understand the history of empires to fully understand the complexity of the concept and to utilize the framework of imperial theories to analyze present day international relations. Four elements of empires are emphasized and reviewed. The four elements of empires are applied to the argument of imperial tendencies in America and the European Union. The main conclusion is that various empires throughout history have differed in areas of government, legitimacy, assimilation and integration, and duration, but that they also have certain fundamental similarities that can be applied to the analysis of imperial tendencies in current international relations. References. E. Sundby

On October 3, 2018, the so-called "Arctic Five plus Five" concluded the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean (CAOFA, CAOF Agreement or Ilulissat Agreement). The CAOFA establishes a precautionary framework for the regulation of fisheries in the high seas of the central Arctic Ocean (CAO), including a temporary moratorium on unregulated commercial fishing. The purpose of this debate article is not to discuss the CAOFA's provisions on fisheries as such, but to take a look at a number of interesting and novel provisions concerning the interests of indigenous and local communities, particularly with respect to incorporation of indigenous and local knowledge into science-based fisheries management in the CAO.