Suchergebnisse

The standoff between Russia and the West over Ukraine has already obstructed cooperation across a range of issues. Could it also affect state interaction between Norway and Russia in the Arctic—an area and a relationship long characterized by a culture of compromise and/or cooperation? Here we start from the theoretical premise that states are not pre-constituted political entities, but are constantly in the making. How Russia views its own role and how it views other actors in the Arctic changes over time, calling for differing approaches. That holds true for Norway as well. To clarify the premises for interaction between Russia and Norway in the Arctic, we scrutinize changes in official discourse on Self and Other in the Arctic on both sides in the period 2012 to 2016, to establish what kind of policy mode—"realist," "institutionalist," or "diplomatic management"—has underlain the two countries' official discourse in that period. Has Norway continued to pursue "balancing" policies undertaken in the realist mode with those in the diplomatic management mode? Which modes have characterized Russia's approach toward Norway? Finding that realist-mode policies increasingly dominate on both sides, in the conclusion we discuss how the changing mode of the one state affects that of the other, and why a New Cold War is now spreading to the Arctic.

Since the Cold War have peace and reconciliation policies hold an ever greater place in Norwegian foreign policy, not least in the debate on the same. This contribution argues that this debate has been going awry on the way. Instead of a thinking abstractly, focusing on whether this policy is 'realistic' or 'idealistic', we should think of concrete, and ask how it could possibly affect the scope for Norwegian foreign policy. My answer to the question is that the Norwegian peace and reconciliation policy helps to maintain the current global order by removing disruptive that can spread and lead to systemic change. Understood so is peace and reconciliation policy in the middle of the Norwegian foreign main tradition, which is a help to 'a better organized world.'. Adapted from the source document.

Investigations carried out over the course of the last decade have revealed that during much of the Cold War, Sweden espoused a Janus-like policy in which there stood an open non-alignment & neutrality doctrine alongside a secret arrangement to cooperate with Western powers in the event of a Soviet invasion or a European war. This article focuses on what is here suggested to be a series of attempts to rewrite or edit this particular phase of Swedish political history, given the incompatibility of the two stances that Sweden assumed during this period. The author treats some of the highly controversial Swedish policies concerning alignment with the West, in particular with the United States & NATO. References. C. Brunski

This article presents the opinion that American exceptionalism has returned post 9/11. It is argued that Ronald Reagan's international relations during the cold war displayed the attitude that power is more important than intellectual, factual, historical, ideological, or moral obligations. The uses of power employed by Americans in international conflicts are compared to the uses of power employed by empires of the past. A historical exploration is included of the development of exceptionalist attitudes from the founding of the US in the 1700's, throughout the continual expansions of the 1800's and into the industrial and military power of the 1900's. It is further argued that American traditions during the early 1900's border on messianism, where the American people are the chosen people, and that Reaganism was a natural extension of these traditions, whereas post Reagan there was no need for American messianism or exceptionalism, and thus American Presidents sought a new world order where the US would participate in integrated global economics and politics in cooperation with other nations. George W. Bush's politics post 9/11 with its war on terror marked the return of American exceptionalism. E. Sundby

In the 1990s, American public diplomacy was built down & neglected following its merits during the Cold War. After September 11, (2001), this field has, however, had a renaissance. But at present, the Cold War situation is inverted. In the struggle against communism, the US typically faced hostile regimes with populations yearning for Western ideology & values. Today a heavy reliance on mechanisms of marketing seems to have deteriorated US public diplomacy, whereas the Arab world is far from fertile soil for US public diplomacy. America's current enemies tend to be sub-national actors with hostile perceptions of the US, & larger populations show strong anti-American sentiments. Most activities that are labeled public diplomacy also belong in the realm of propaganda, but so-called white propaganda -- ie, the sender is known. But can public diplomacy work unless the state it originates from combines it with a policy that is saleable to the target audience? 1 Figure, 51 References. Adapted from the source document.

A historical discussion on the foreign policy relationship between Norway and the United States and its future perspectives. The Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI), founded in 1959, can legitimately be called a child of the Cold War. During the 1950's Norway's main focus was to stand between the two super powers of the United States and the Soviet Union. Already in the 1960's this role began to diminish due to improvements in weapon technology and became even smaller in the 1970's when Norwegian left leaning parties started to openly oppose the United States. In the 1980's Norway tried its best to become visible for Washington, a project that somewhat failed due to Ronald Regan's focus on the internal economy and rolling back communism abroad. Overall the relationship to the United States has almost exclusively been based on foreign policy even if cultural ties have made Norway the most Americanized country in Europe. Adapted from the source document.