Search results

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.

International Politics has been characterized as an American social science. This article traces the early development of the discipline in Sweden in the shadow of US hegemony. The advantages & disadvantages of the Swedish decision to keep International Relations (IR) within the broader discipline of Political Science are discussed. Recalling the early tensions between International Politics & Peace & Conflict Research, the author identifies some prominent traits in the development of Swedish IR in recent decades. Finally, broader developments in IR research generally are outlined in terms of consecutive debates, continuously broadening research themes, fashions, reaction to dramatic events in the world, & dialectics between paradigms emphasizing anarchy or order. References. Adapted from the source document.

A review essay on books by (1) Mai'a K. Davis Cross, The European Diplomatic Corps. Diplomats and International Cooperation from Westphalia to Maastricht (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007); (2) Carne Ross, Independent Diplomat: Dispatches from an Unnaccountable Elite (London: Hurst & Co., 2007); (3) Brian Hocking and David Spence [Eds], Foreign Ministries in the European Union: Integrating Diplomats (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005) & (4) Graham Ziegner [Ed], British Diplomacy: Foreign Secretaries Reflect (London: Politico's, 2007).

In Norway, 2005 was a year of celebrations, linkel, first & foremost, to the fact that 100 years had passed since the peaceful dissolution of the personal union between Norway & Sweden. Despite the absence of broad popular support for the idea that this should merit any celebrations, government & media spent considerable resources on high-profile promotion of the 1905 story, including the side-events leading up to or following the famous 7 June Declaration of the Norwegian Storting (Parliament). In the context of nation-building, historical milestones tend to take on a flavor of history-building, -- the stuff that national myths are made of. In the saga of Norwegian nation-building, 1905 had come to play a perhaps surprisingly inflated role. Thus -- less surprisingly -- in the interpretation handed over to a contemporary audience, the various events of 1905 have been suffused with a series of myths, some of which have assumed the character of national dogmas. In particular, the author explores the myths surrounding the referendum of 12-13 November 1905, & demonstrates how vested interests have been instrumental in consolidating the popular (but false) interpretation that the real issue of the referendum was Norway's constitution (monarchy vs. republic) & not the conditions set forth by Prince Carl of Denmark for accepting the offer made by the Norwegian Government & its parliament to assume the Norwegian throne. In fact, employing devious tactics, prime Minister Michelsen succeeded not only in winning a comfortable victory for prince Carl's candidacy (whereby the prince became King Haakon VII of Norway), but he also managed to entrench the notion that the referendum above all was a resounding confirmation of a (continued) monarchical constitutional order. The long-term effect (which is still very much a defining feature of Norway's political self-image) was to give the country's republicans (who, at the onset of 1905 were a dominant force in the Norwegian political discourse) a permanently marginalized position as a fringe movement of eccentrics & certified losers. References. Adapted from the source document.

The Norwegian-based journal International Politics is renewing itself with a new reaction and a new vision: more articles, sharper debate, and tighter international development, while remaining flexible and holding the bar high. The history of the 70 year old journal is discussed with the colorful developments throughout the years. In an anglicizing age, the journal is among the most significant ones in its field, with high citation rankings and a wide audience. L. Pitkaniemi