Suchergebnisse

When Nordic political scientists talk about dictatorships, they often refer to dictators in exotic lands, forgetting that Denmark-Norway was a dictatorship between 1660 and 1814. During that period the country was an authoritarian dictatorship with some totalitarian characteristics that spent between 1/3 and 2/3 of its budget on the army. Denmark, Norway and Sweden - that shared similar characteristics - were eventually able to break away from this, due to the growth of stable administrative, juridical and to some extent social institutions. The development towards the final breakaway in Norway and Denmark, which occurred in 1814 respectively 1848, is described in detail. L. Pitkaniemi

Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, & Hungary have in little more than ten years established market-based economies. The countries chose, in spite of geographical proximity & historical links, different reform strategies, especially with respect to inflation stabilization & privatization. The different strategies can to a large extent be explained by different starting points. In preparation for EU membership, the economic policies in the four countries have gradually converged. The economic results have been mixed. Many have gained from greater choice & higher living standards. Still, economic growth is only slightly above the performance of the EU countries, unemployment is high, & government budgets exhibit large deficits. Membership of the EU could bring about more trade & investment & help narrow the income gap towards Western Europe. Adapted from the source document.

Provides three arguments for why the European Union should be an important factor in the Norwegian foreign policy discussion and analyzes the previous debate on the matter. Despite the fact that Norway is not part of the EU, the country still conducts more trade with the Union than most countries within the Union do. Harmonization of the rules would also be important for Norway, especially when the European Union has larger budget consequences for the Norwegian government year after year. Surprisingly, during the two decades of policy debate from 1988 to 2008, the EU has had a smaller role than the US in the Norwegian media. In addition, the Norwegian EU debate is dominated by strong yes/no interest groups and often takes the form of debate theater with predictable answers with very little practical importance. L. Pitkaniemi