Suchergebnisse

Acknowledges that Norwegian participation in the Security Council led to some good things (the Mar 2002 Mideast peace resolution, the settling of the Eritrean-Ethiopian conflict), the breakdown of the Security Council over the Iraq question during this period does not reflect well on anyone, even Norway. Norway also was too willing to accommodate the US's demands for immunity from any International Criminal Court indictments. It is unlikely that Norway will serve on the Security Council in the near future, but it is hoped that the council itself will be reformed, & no longer will be subject to the same veto pressures of the five permanent members. A. Siegel

The author analyzes EU actor capacity in security policy with special emphasis on crisis management. She places this within the larger context of security policy & the transatlantic debate over the role of NATO, the case of Iraq, & different national interests of key member states. The author concludes that the EU has steadily developed its capacity to undertake the various types of crisis management, but that the role of the EU as a security actor will be determined by the larger systemic decision making in this area. The crisis over Iraq may very well lead to a consolidation of the EU's role. 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

At the close of Norway's 2-year appointment to one of the rotating seats of the UN Security Council, the actions of the Security Council, & Norway in particular, are reviewed by Norway's ambassador to the UN, with particular attention to the correlation between Norway's UN votes & its own foreign policy. Also discussed is the political campaigning that UN members must engage in for consideration for Security Council seats, not only with countries from other parts of the world but with other Nordic countries. Norway's service on the council coincided with the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 & the US-led war against the Taliban in Afghanistan that followed. Norway played a large role in mediating Horn of Africa conflicts between Ethiopia & Eritrea, & the civil unrest in Somalia. The ambassador also addresses the outsized influence that the P-5 (the five permanent Security Council members) play in decision making, & also summarizes Norway's role in the ongoing Iraq question, as well as the installation of the International Criminal Court. A. Siegel

The ramifications for Norwegian foreign policy, as a non-member of the European Union, are radically changed since the Cold War. The world has changed from a bipolar order with the US as a conserving superpower, to a unipolar world with the US as a radical superpower. 11 September 2001, & the following war on terrorism, has been a catalyst in this respect. As a result the US is today relating to international institutions as far as they are instrumental in the enhancement of American values & interests. The alliance between the US & Norway today lacks a common denominator. The threat from the east is gone. Still, Norwegian foreign policy & alliance orientation is very much the same as before. Why? Is it because reorientation for foreign policy comes harder in Norway than elsewhere? Historically, foreign policy in Norway has been more a question of administration than one of policy making. Furthermore, broad political consensus on foreign policy is a main political objective in itself. This has left little room for public & political discourse on foreign policy. The benefit is stability. The cost is reduced ability to adapt to radical international changes. A third factor is the ever-lasting question of Norwegian EU membership, which has made interest-based foreign policy more difficult. Norway outside the power blocs of international politics must balance on the interests of other states. Therefore, a clear understanding of Norwegian interests in 2005 -- outside the EU & dc-linked from the reflexes of the Cold War -- is needed. 10 References. Adapted from the source document.

The article gives a background to the resumption of peace negotiations in Nicosia in Jan 2002. The negotiations follow on a period of increased polarization in the conflict resulting from the prospects that Cyprus will be admitted to the European Union (EU). Concepts from ripeness theory are thereafter used in an analysis of whether the Cyprus conflict is now ripe for resolution. Although the prospect of EU membership is found to have provided Greek & Turkish Cypriots with new incentives to strike a deal in their long-standing conflict, the prevailing asymmetry -- to which EU has added -- raises doubts on the possibility of reaching an agreement in time for admission. In addition, on neither side has the ground been prepared for a compromise settlement. However, the development of EU's relationship with Turkey is found to be of even more crucial importance, as that will have a decisive effect on the respective parties' incentive structure. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

Norwegian foreign policy has historically been influenced by four factors: neutrality/isolationism, moralism, internationalism, & sector orientation, all of which can be seen in contemporary foreign policy, although the neutral/isolationist strain has been waning as the internationalist one has been waxing. There remain pronounced moralist & sector orientation tendencies. Discussed are the role played by these four factors since Norwegian independence in 1905, recognition by Norwegian policymakers of a historical triangulation of powers (first Denmark, Sweden, & Finland, then Russia, Germany, & England, followed by the USSR, the EU, & the US), the Norwegian self-image, & responses to September 11, 2001, as well as the collapse of the Soviet Union & changes in Europe in the past decade. A. Siegel

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