Suchergebnisse

This article analyzes Sweden's foreign policy 2011–2018. The article is part of a special issue on how the Nordic countries have responded to recent geopolitical change. The international context in which Sweden finds itself has in a number of ways changed drastically during the time of analysis. The foundations of Sweden's foreign policy, however, have seen less change. The Swedish policy adjustments we see are rather the effects of radical change taking place in the previous two decades: the EU membership, the partnership with NATO, and the abandonment of the policy of neutrality. Sweden is thus learning how to adapt to this transformation of its international orientation during a turbulent time in global politics. The article includes an overview of Swedish foreign policy and the literature on the topic. We discuss the major actors, institutions, tools and frameworks in the foreign policy making process. A detailed analysis of the Foreign Minister's Statement of Government Policy provides a temporal comparison over the last decade.

Sentralforvaltningen her til lands har de siste tiårene blitt internasjonalisert. Globale spørsmål legger beslag på stadig større ressurser i staten, men samordningen mellom departementene har ikke utviklet seg i samme takt. Norsk utenrikspolitikk ligger derfor ikke bare fast, den ligger også spredt. Komplekse globale utfordringer (terror, klimaendringer, pandemier, biodiversitet, cybertrusler, migrasjon m.v.) krever et langt tettere samarbeid for blant annet å reversere økt fragmentering – i en offentlig sektor hvor vi er satt opp med sterke fagdepartementer og svake samordningsmekanismer. Samtidig innvarsler byggingen av det nye regjeringskvartalet endringer i måten norsk (utenriks)politikk vil bli gjennomført på. Forholdet mellom fagspesialister og diplomatiske generalister blir tettere og vil utfordre den diplomatiske rollen og selvforståelsen på nye måter. Diplomatiets kjerneoppgaver vil endres. Blant annet vil langt bedre koordinering bli en hovedutfordring for utenrikspolitikken. Artikkelen trekker derfor opp noen problemstillinger og forslag som innspill til debatten,
Abstract in English:Track IV: The Future of DiplomacyOver the past decades, Norwegian ministries have become more internationalized. Global issues take up ever more of their time and resources, but cross-sectorial coordination has been lagging behind. Norwegian foreign policy is therefore fragmented. Complex global challenges (terrorism, climate change, pandemics, biodiversity, cyber threats, migration, etc.) call for much closer inter-ministerial cooperation to reverse increased fragmentation – in a public sector where sectorial responsibilities are strong and coordination mechanisms few. The new block housing most of the offices of the Government in central Oslo is a signal change for how Norwegian foreign policies will be conducted in the years ahead. Sector specialists and diplomatic generalists will move closer together, working under the same roof, and this will challenge the classic diplomatic role and the way diplomats look at themselves. Our core tasks will change. Improved coordination will move to the forefront of the work we do. The article presents an idea or two for a much-needed debate.

Det er ingen tvil om at hendelsesforløp som ble igangsatt 11. september 2001 har vært med på å prege global politikk i de to tiårene som har gått. Men ble terrorangrepene mot USA 11. september 2001 definerende for hvordan vi forstår internasjonal politikk og hvordan vi studerer det? Basert på en gjennomgang av studiet av internasjonal politikk over de siste 20 årene argumenterer vi i denne artikkelen at svaret her er mer tvetydig. Tvetydig fordi det utvilsomt har skjedd endringer og fordi det er lett å peke på utviklingstrekk i faget Internasjonal Politikk (IP) som har direkte eller indirekte utspring i hendelsene høsten 2001. Terrorismestudier fikk for eksempel et umiddelbart oppsving, og med den amerikanske invasjonen av Irak i 2003 kom en øket interesse for emner som imperial makt, opprørsbekjempelse og normativ internasjonal teori. Mer tvetydig fordi vi slett ikke er sikre på at de viktigste utviklingstrekkene i IP de siste tiårene kan forklares med 11. september. Vi er også usikre på hvor varige endringene i kjølvannet av 11. september kan sies å være. Vår tentative hypotese er at 11. september på kort og mellomlang sikt hadde betydelig effekt på vektleggingen av forskjellige emner innen IP. På lengre sikt var terrorangrepene og ettervirkningene av dem viktigst for fagutviklingen på de områdene der det umiddelbare sjokket bidro til å forsterke allerede eksisterende trender.
Abstract in English:The Study of International Politics After 11 September 2001To what extent did 9/11 impact the discipline of International Relations (IR)? In the current article, we argue that while the impact of 9/11 on global politics is undeniable, the verdict when it comes to the discipline in charge of studying these events, IR, is more ambiguous. For while IR and the study of global politics has changed over time, the discipline is, we argue, as much prone to "internal" changes as it is to external shocks. Thus, we suggest a model for understanding the sociology of science of IR which takes into account both internal and external sources of change. While IR would have looked quite different today without the attacks of 9/11, we argue that we would still have been able to recognize it.

The Arctic is characterized by a well-functioning international governance regime. Arctic and non-Arctic states aim to solve the challenges following climate change in concert. However, certain challenges and processes may destabilize the intergovernmental order in the long run. This report distinguishes between global and regional dynamics. Future global struggles between the great powers may have repercussions in the high north. On the regional level itself, four questions may destabilize Arctic governance: the status of the North-East Passage, unresolved border disputes, the role of China, and the introduction of more military capabilities. The report offers two guidelines for the strategic approach of the Commonwealth of Denmark towards the Arctic. Firstly, the Commonwealth can play a constructive role for the future stability of the Arctic by aiming, to the extent possible, to solve the four regional challenges. Secondly, the approach of the Commonwealth towards the question of Arctic stability cannot be disentangled from Copenhagen's global priorities.

Bærekraftsmålene har gitt klassiske spørsmål innenfor utviklingspolitikken ny relevans: Hvem skal betale for globale fellesgoder? Kan man bruke bistand til dette formålet, eller bør den reserveres for innsats i spesifikke fattige land? I denne artikkelen undersøker vi hvordan DAC-landene, som kollektiv og hver for seg, forholder seg til disse temaene. Vi finner at de sliter med å følge en konsistent linje. Vi mener norske myndigheter kan tjene på å konseptualisere internasjonale fellesgoder bedre. Da blir det for det første enklere å ha en prinsipiell holdning til finansieringen av dem. For det andre kan en slik forståelse gi grunnlag for en strategisk tilnærming til nye initiativer. Det er liten grunn til å tro at man vil ha mye større budsjetter til rådighet fremover. Teorien viser dessuten at man må forvente at det er optimalt å bruke skreddersøm for å fremskaffe ulike fellesgoder. Det krever detaljkunnskap. Vi trenger større forståelse av hvordan eksisterende multilaterale organisasjoner og mekanismer som håndterer både bistand og globale fellesgoder virker. Vi trenger dessuten mer innsikt i hvordan dagens multilaterale system fungerer på ulike felt. Norge kan og bør bidra til det globale fellesgodet som denne typen kunnskap utgjør.
Abstract in EnglishBetween Politics and Statistics: Global Collective Goods and Development PolicyThe adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals has revived some classical issues in development policy: Who should pay for global collective goods? Can foreign aid be used for this purpose, or should such financing be reserved for efforts in specific poor countries? In this article we investigate how the members of the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD, collectively as well as individually, approach these questions. We find that they struggle to be consistent. In our opinion, the Norwegian government could gain from developing a better conceptualisation of global collective goods. This will first of all make it easier to have a consistent policy with respect to financing them. Secondly, such a conceptualisation will allow for a more strategic approach to new initiatives. Going forward, aid budgets are unlikely to grow much. Moreover, theory demonstrates that it is in general optimal to tailor the provision of different collective goods to the peculiarities of each case. This implies that expertise is essential. We need a better understanding of the functioning of existing multilateral organisations and mechanisms that manage both aid and global collective goods. In addition, more knowledge about the workings of the current multilateral system in different fields is required. Such knowledge is a global collective good and Norway could and should contribute to its provision.

Med fem ulike bidrag fra norske samfunnsforskere setter dette fokusnummeret søkelys på norsk klima- og utenrikspolitikk. Bidragene i fokusnummeret viser at det har skjedd en vesentlig sammenkobling av politikkområder som tidligere har vært atskilt, og at klimapolitikken spiller en stadig større rolle i andre politikkområder, slik som utenriks-, handels- og kraftpolitikken. I tillegg kommer det frem at det internasjonale klimaregimet, til tross for nær universell ratifisering av Parisavtalen, stadig fragmenteres. Norge har reagert på dette med å knytte seg stadig tettere til EU, både når det gjelder klima- og kraftpolitikk. Videre påpeker fokusnummeret at internasjonale omdømmekostnader og økende global etterspørsel etter fornybar energi øker presset på en rask grønn omstilling, også innenlands. I sum fremstår Norges ambisjon om å være en global klimaforkjemper som stadig mer uforenelig med rollen som storskala produsent av olje og gass.
Abstract in English:Norwegian Climate and Foreign Policy: Is the Ambition to Be a Global Climate Leader Compatible with Norway's Role as an Oil Producer?The five contributions in this special issue all focus on various aspects of Norwegian climate and foreign policy. The special issue highlights the interconnectedness of policy areas that previously have been separate in showing how climate policy plays an increasing role in other policy domains, such as foreign, trade and energy politics. Even if the Paris Agreement enjoys near universal ratification, the international climate regime is becoming increasingly fragmented. As a result, Norwegian climate policy is becoming increasingly integrated with the EU in both climate and energy regulation. Moreover, the special issue highlights how international reputational costs and increasing future demand for renewable energy are putting additional pressure on a rapid green transition, also domestically. Taken together, Norway's ambition to be a global climate leader appears more and more incompatible with its role as a large producer of oil and gas.

Denne artikkelen undersøker diskursens rolle i konsolidering av autoritære regimer. Gjennom å etablere en dialog mellom Jacques Rancières arbeider om politikk og avpolitisering og poststrukturalistisk diskursanalyse argumenterer artikkelen for at diskursiv avpolitisering bidrar til at autokratier befester seg, og viser at autoritær konsolidering ofte finner sted i skjæringsfeltet mellom nasjonal og internasjonal politikk. Artikkelen retter et særskilt søkelys på Rancières begrep om kløfter som politikkens scene, og teoretiserer hvordan slike kløfter nøytraliseres i avpolitisering. Artikkelen fremsetter så en metode for å analysere diskursiv avpolitisering empirisk ved å konseptualisere Rancières logikker som idealtypiske avpolitiseringsdiskurser, og illustrerer denne analytiske strategien ved å anvende den på russisk offisiell diskurs i senere år (2015–2020). Slik forklarer artikkelen hvordan diskursive konstruksjoner har befestet Russland som autokrati: Den viser at autoritær konsolidering i Russland under Putin muliggjøres av rotfestede avpolitiserende diskurser som (re)produseres og forsterkes i et sammenvevet innenriks- og utenrikspolitisk felt. Artikkelen fremmer begrepet diskursiv avpolitisering som et nytt perspektiv på fagdebatter om den liberale verdensordens utfordringer og såkalte hybridregimer.
Abstract in English:Depoliticizing Democracy Through Discourse: Understanding Authoritarian Consolidation in Russia through Jacques Rancière's Political TheoryThis article investigates the role of discourses in processes of authoritarian consolidation. By bringing Jacques Rancière's works on politics and depoliticization into dialogue with poststructuralist discourse analysis, the article argues that discursive depoliticization contributes towards authoritarian consolidation, and displays how authoritarianism deepens in a co-dependent nexus of domestic and international politics. Focusing in particular on Rancière's concept of gaps as the stage for politics, the article theorizes how gaps are neutralized in depoliticization. The article offers a method for unpacking discursive depoliticization empirically by conceptualizing Rancière's logics as ideal-typical depoliticizing discourses, and illustrates this analytical strategy through analysis of Russian official discourse in recent years (2015–2020). The article thereby explains how discursive constructions have strengthened Russian autocracy: Entrenched depoliticizing discourses, produced and reinforced in a co-constitutive internal/external sphere, makes possible authoritarian consolidation in Russia under Putin. The article puts forward the concept of discursive depoliticization as a novel perspective on challenges to the liberal international order, and on "hybrid" regimes.

Den islamske republikken Iran har bygd et transnasjonalt nettverk av sjiamilitser siden 1979, ofte referert til som dens asymmetriske krigføringsstyrke og 'strategiske dybde'. Mens det er velkjent at Iran har mobilisert disse aktørene for å styrke sin regionale posisjon, har hvordan den har gjort det blitt viet lite vitenskapelig oppmerksomhet. Denne artikkelen forsøker derfor å forklare dette fenomenet ved å undersøke hvordan Iran har mobilisert irakiske sjiamilitser siden 1979. De utvalgte analyseenhetene representerer de mest innflytelsesrike sjiamilitsene med tilknytning til Iran i Irak i dag: Badr Organisation, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq og Kata'ib Hizbullah. Selv om variasjon eksisterer mellom dem, er alle del av et transnasjonalt nettverk som har hjulpet Iran med å delta i skjult og/eller indirekte konfliktintervensjon i Midtøsten i flere tiår. Den komparative casestudien har blitt benyttet som forskningsdesign, med prosessporing og semi-strukturerte intervjuer som metode for datainnsamling. Den empiriske analysen har blitt rettledet av et teoretisk rammeverk som har forsøkt å bygge en bro mellom contentious politics og eksisterende litteratur om dynamikken mellom stater og væpnede opprørere. De empiriske funnene antyder at Iran har opptrådt som en sekterisk entreprenør som på pragmatisk vis har kombinert sine materielle og ikke-materielle ressurser for å mobilisere likesinnede militser til å delta i kollektiv vold og fremme felles krav.
Abstract in English:
The Islamic Republic of Iran has been building a transnational network of Shi'a militias since 1979, commonly referred to as its asymmetric warfare capability and 'strategic depth'. While it is a known fact that Iran has mobilised Shi'a militias in other countries to strengthen its regional position, how they have done it has not received much scholarly attention. The objective of this paper is to explain this phenomenon by examining how Iran has mobilised Iraqi Shi'a militias since 1979. The selected cases are the mobilisation processes of three most prominent Shi'a militias in Iraq today: Badr Organisation, Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, and Kata'ib Hizbullah. Although variation exists between them, they are all cases of Iran's network of armed resistance groups, which have allowed it to engage in covert or indirect conflict intervention in the Middle East. To logically connect the empirical data with the study's research question, I have used a case study research design, with process tracing and the semi-structured interview as methods for data collection. Furthermore, the empirical analysis has been guided by a theoretical framework that has attempted to build a bridge between the existing literatures on state-militia dynamics and contentious politics.

Selv om Danmark efter sigende fik »verdens bedste miljølov« i 1973 præges miljøbeskyttelsesloven af iværksættelsesproblemer. Halvdelen af de særligt forurenende virksomheder modtager ikke et eneste tilsynsbesøg om året, og halvdelen af virksomhederne har stadig ikke en miljøgodkendelse. Da reguleringen er altovervejende baseret på ren administrativ styring med et imponerende ressourcekrav, må markarbejderne i miljøforvaltningerne udvikle særlig konsulentrolle som reaktion på et administrativt overload. Implementeringen af miljøbeskyttelsesloven må ses som en genuin politisk proces, snarere end en mekanisk af en vedtagen lov. Stærke interesser af økonomisk og bureaukratisk karakter fik under udformningen af lovgivningen indbygget en række indflydelsesmuligheder og vetopunkter med henblik på implementeringen, hvor aktørerne såvel legitimt som illegitimt fortsætte spillet fra beslutningsprocessen om reguleringen. ; The basic danish environmental law, passed in 1973, was structured with extention of the traditional patterns of participation, not only delegating local authorities a major responsibility, also allowing interest organizations of the regulated to play a major role during implementation. chosen regulation was solely administrative and during the decision-making process the different actors managed to complicate the law with further vetopoints as well as accesspoints influence. The implementation gap in Danish environmental regulation is to be explained the genuine political character of the implementation proces. The complicated procedures rules are defended by the strong interests, and the resulting administrative overload influences strategies of the street-level environmental bureaucracy. Often ignoring formal rules the local inspectors seek an advisor-role helping companies to comply, but leaving more than half of the especially polluting firms unattended, according to offical figures. The prevailing neo-corporative regulation seems unable to cope with the need for change arising from the ecological crisis.

A current ambition in welfare states across Europe and in the US is for political decision-making to be based on rigorous research (Bason 2010; Cartwright et al 2009; Mulgan 2009; Nilsson et al. 2008). Promoted as 'evidence-based policy-making', 'good analysis, or 'better governance' (Nilsson et.al. 2008) the aspiration finds its roots in the governance paradigm generally referred to as 'new public management' (Hartley 2005) and the central concern for developing a cost-effective and agile public sector (Rod 2010). . Sound as this ambition may seem, it has nevertheless been problematized from within the civil services and from the research community (e.g. Boden & Epstein 2006; Cartwright et al. 2009; Elliott & Popay 2000; House of Commons 2006; Nilsson et al. 2008; Whitty 2006; Rod 2010, Vohnsen 2011). Some warn that the term 'evidence-based' is used too lightly, and often in cases where 'evidence' has not fed into the policy processes but rather has been invoked after the fact to support already agreed upon policy (House of Commons 2006; Nilsson et al. 2008); others warn that politics and science are – if not incompatible – then at odds with one another (e.g. Boden & Epstein 2006; Whitty 2006). The article pin-points the friction points between science and policy-making and discuss why it is that evidence rarely feeds into policy-making and how the evidence-based paradigm effectively challenges the traditional craftsmanship of the civil service.

The regional powerhouse, South Africa, has since the introduction of the nonracial democratic dispensation in 1994, played a central and important role in the formation of both the regional and continental security architecture. With the establishment of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in 1992, one of the central areas of collaboration for the community was envisioned to be security, understood within a broadened human security framework. Security was therefore from the outset one of the cornerstones of integration in the SADC. It was believed that the formation of a security community would help dismantle the enmities that had plagued regional relations during the apartheid era. For some parties, institutionalisation of relations pointed to a means of stabilising and disseminating a particular order. Such institutions depict the power relations prevailing at the time of their establishment, which, however, can change over time (Cox 1981:136). The integration ambition surrounding security correlated with the ambitions of South Africa, the new democratic government in the regional powerhouse. South Africa and its overall foreign policy ambitions desired the pursuit of peace, democracy and stability for economic growth and development in the region and within South Africa itself. Since South Africa's acceptance into the SADC in 1994, the organisation has attempted to set up the required institutional framework to enable co-operation on security, both in terms of narrow military co-operation and regarding designated 2 softer security issues, such as migration and cross-border crime. The military cooperation moved forward in the early years after 1994 with the 1996 decision of creating an Organ for Politics, Defence and Security Co-operation (OPDSC)1 and later the signing of the Mutual Defence Pact (MDP) in 2003, and eventually the creation of the Strategic Indicative Plan for the Organ (SIPO) in 2004, which operationalised the OPDSC (SADC 2004). However, the actual military cooperation, e.g. military exercises, came close to a standstill. Several developments obstructed military co-operation of which the evolving crisis in Zimbabwe and the subsequent withdrawal of donor support to, for instance, the Regional Peacekeeping Training Centre (RPTC) in Harare are but two examples. The RPTC constituted the backbone of the co-operation, but political differences between member states illustrated during the Zimbabwean crisis and following the mandate of the interventions in especially the DR Congo and partly Lesotho in 1998 all contributed to regional tensions.2 Despite the crisis, SADC members, and in particular South Africa, declared that the organisation would be able to form a regional stand-by brigade for the use of the African Union (AU) as part of its wider security architecture. On 17 August 2007, the SADC declared its stand-by-force operational at a large parade in Lusaka, Zambia and at the same occasion signed a memorandum of understanding on the SADCBRIG (SADC 2007). According to the timeline provided by the AU, the brigade should be fully operational by June 2010. Former South African deputy foreign minister Aziz Pahad stated after the launch that this was an important step, but that now there was much to be done securing joint levels and types of training, interoperability, etc. (Pahad 2007). The question that continues to linger is to what extent this brigade is operational and for what purpose. Is this new regional military formation in its present form just a paper tiger, or is it "real progress" and an example of "successful" regional cooperation and integration? This article scrutinises the security co-operation and integration in SADC and asks whether an apparent lack of common values between SADC member states are blocking the security integration process, the creation of a security community, and thereby the establishment of an effective stand-by brigade, the so-called SADCBRIG. The article furthermore attempts to scrutinise the role played by South Africa in establishing the SADCBRIG.

Artikkelen diskuterer forholdet mellom den europeiske integrasjonsprosessen og det atlantiske samarbeidet under USAs ledelse. Problemstillingen artikkelen besvarer er hvilke tilnærminger Trump-administrasjonen har hatt til EUs sikkerhets- og forsvarspolitikk, og hvordan vi kan forklare denne tilnærmingen. I særlig grad dreier dette seg om balansegangen mellom europeisk strategisk autonomi på den ene siden, og amerikansk lederskap i Nato på den andre. Dette forholdet må forstås i lys av spørsmålet om lederskap i euroatlantisk sikkerhetspolitikk, noe som har vært et gjennomgangstema i europeisk integrasjon siden starten på 1950-tallet. Med en organisasjonsteoretisk tilnærming søker artikkelen å forklare hvorfor USA inntar et mer instrumentelt perspektiv overfor EU. Et slikt perspektiv innebærer at USA prioriterer ressurser til de områdene i verden der USA står overfor de største sikkerhetspolitiske utfordringene. For å forklare denne utviklingen diskuterer artikkelen USAs holdninger til EUs nyere forsvarsinitiativer og supermaktens ambivalens i forhold til disse. I møte med den nye Biden-administrasjonen blir det derfor viktig å avklare grunnlaget for det transatlantiske sikkerhetsfellesskapet. Et slikt fellesskap dreier seg ikke bare om felles interesser, men også om delte normer og verdier om hvordan en skal håndtere felles sikkerhetsutfordringer.
Abstract in English:Why So Ambivalent? US Policies Towards the EU's Defence AmbitionsThe article discusses the relationship between the European integration process and Atlantic cooperation under US leadership. The research question the article answers is what kind of approaches the Trump Administration has had towards the EU's security and defence policies and how we can explain these approaches. More precisely, the article discusses the balances between European strategic autonomy on the one hand and American leadership in NATO on the other. This has all to do with the question of leadership in Euro-Atlantic security politics, which has been an enduring question ever since the European integrations process was initiated during the 1950's. By utilising an organisation theoretical approach, the article seeks to explain why the US approaches the EU from an instrumental point of view. Such a perspective implies that the US priorities resources to those areas in the world where the US faces its greatest challenges. To explain this development the article discusses the US' attitudes towards the EU's defence package and the superpower's ambivalence towards it. When assessing the new Biden Administration, it therefore becomes important to explain the foundation for the transatlantic security community. Such a community is not about common interests only, but also about shared norms and values on how to handle common security challenges.

Den fremvoksende supermakten og gigantøkonomien Kina har vist vilje og evne til å ta i bruk økonomiske virkemidler for å forme ikke bare egen region, men også for å skaffe global innflytelse. I dette bokessayet tar vi for oss fire bidrag om ulike sider ved Kinas økonomiske statshåndverk. Bøkene handler om graden av kontroll over kommersielle aktører i Kinas bruk av økonomisk statshåndverk (Norris, 2016), valutahåndverk og Kinas forsøk på å internasjonalisere sin valuta renminbi (Cohen, 2019), Kinas kollektive finanshåndverk gjennom BRICS-samarbeidet (Roberts et al., 2017) og Kinas gigantiske infrastrukturprosjekt (Clarke et al., 2020). Samlet viser bøkene spennet i økonomiske virkemidler Kina har til rådighet. Vi har en klar agenda med lesningen. Vi lurer først på hva som er de innovative aspektene ved bidragene. Dernest bruker vi bøkene til å svare på tre problemstillinger knyttet til Kinas fremvekst og dets økonomiske statshåndverk: (i) hva er Kinas ambisjoner?, (ii) hva gjør Kina? og (iii) leverer Kina på ambisjonene? Til slutt forsøker vi å løfte blikket og diskutere kort hvordan kunnskapstilstanden kan bedres fremover.
Abstract in English:China's Economic Statecraft: Ambitions, Behavior, and AchievementsThe rise of China as a superpower and economic giant has massive consequences for world politics. China has ambitions and capabilities to make use of its new economic muscles to not only shape its own region but also to increase its influence globally. In this book essay, we analyze four contributions to various facets of Chinese economic statecraft. The books concern the level of control of commercial actors in the Chinese leadership's economic statecraft (Norris, 2016), currency statecraft and China's attempts to internationalize its currency (Cohen, 2019), China's collective financial statecraft through the BRICS cooperation (Roberts et al., 2017), and China's enormous infrastructure project (Clarke et al., 2020). Taken together, the books show the extensive scope in the economic tools China has at its disposal. We have a clear agenda with our reading. We are predominantly interested in the innovative aspects of the contributions. We also use the books to answer three research questions concerning China's rise and its economic statecraft: (i) what are China's ambitions?, (ii) what is China's behavior?, and (iii) does China achieve its ambitions? Finally, we build on our reading of the contemporary literature on economic statecraft to outline some blind spots in the research field.