Suchergebnisse

On 1 April 2020, the Latvian fishing company SIA North Star and its owner Peteris Pildegovics initiated an investor-State arbitration against Norway (Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway) at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). This case is not only Norway's first ever ICSID case, but also the first publicly known investor-State arbitration in which an operator of a fishing vessel has brought a claim against a coastal State for allegedly unlawful exercise of prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction in relation to fisheries. The case raises intricate questions concerning the limits of jurisdiction ratione materiae and jurisdiction ratione personae of investment tribunals.

Surveys cooperative roles of the Nordic states in connection to the expansion of the European Union. Overlap between membership in NATO & the EU makes development issues of critical importance for the Nordic states. Aside from taking part in some of the general challenges currently encompassed in the EU agenda, such as the improvement of transatlantic relations & the development of the EU Constitution, the Nordic states should also strive, it is suggested, to play a key role in the EU's expansion to include Baltic states. Nordic investment in environmental development in Russia & the Baltic region, Baltic interest in Nordic policy, & other factors position the Nordic states to be effective role players in the EU expansion. While certain initiatives in this arena have been met with success, a diminished visibility in EU decision making is nonetheless feared. Several suggestions are here made that approach the need to more effectively advance cooperation between both dominant EU powers & newcomers alike. C. Brunski

The author seeks to show that when Germany surprised the world by signaling its disagreement with President Bush regarding the attack on Iraq, it could not be explained by Chancellor Schroder's election campaign, nor by the lack of rapport between the two leaders. At issue are differences regarding principles as well as interests in the wake of the revision of American security policy after September 11, 2001. After reunification, Germany felt freer to express its own interests regarding these & other issues such as closer European security cooperation that Washington now seems to see as a challenge to its own interests. The author concludes by suggesting that this development indicates that the disagreement between Berlin & Washington is not of a temporary nature as some would like to think. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

Since the start of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014, the Nordic states have sought to advance their defence cooperation "beyond peacetime" to also encompass operational military cooperation in crisis and armed conflict. Relations between the two Nordic non-NATO members, Sweden and Finland, have formed a vanguard, encompassing bilateral operational planning beyond peacetime. While no formal security policy guarantees have been exchanged, Sweden and Finland have created strong expectations that they will lend each other support in a crisis. In short, while no formal alliance treaty exists, the two states have nevertheless become closely aligned. In 2020, Sweden and Finland joined NATO member Norway in signalling their intention to strengthen their trilateral defence relationship. The following year, NATO members Norway and Denmark signed a similar agreement with Sweden. The goal of these documents was to coordinate their national operational plans – their "war plans" – and perhaps develop some common operational plans. In this article, it is argued that these agreements fall short of a formal military alliance, but that they represent an alignment policy between the Nordic states.

This article examines whether the thesis of classical realism that political states are primarily motivated by the desire for military and economic power applies to the British Empire (1815-1914). The article questions to what extent the emergence of the British Empire (1815-1914) was driven by Britain's foreign policy to alter existing power structures in international relations. The article offers an overview of pre-imperial, imperial, and post-imperial strategies within the theory classical realism, and then applies these strategies to analyze the pre-imperial (1600-1815), imperial (1815-1914) period of the British Empire. A discussion of the post-imperial period focuses on Britain's maintenance of status quo and its alliance with the U.S. The article concludes that the theory of classical realism in international relations is useful to the discussion of the emergence, use, and maintenance of political power of the British Empire (1814-1915). This article is one in a series of articles on the topic of empires. References. E. Sundby

New uncertainties in international relations have presented several states in the West with important choices regarding their national strategies for the Arctic. This article analyzes security challenges in the Arctic and North Atlantic region, as understood by some key North-Atlantic states, namely: the USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the UK, Germany and France. By analyzing how, or to what degree, the colder east-west security landscape since 2014 is reflected in these selected North Atlantic states' Arctic security strategies, this article seeks to improve our understanding of how the security situation in the northernmost part of the world is developing and being understood. Through applying a traditional understanding of security, the article identifies similarities but also significant differences among the Arctic and North-Atlantic states. Most notable when comparing the strategies is the rather unique global perspective laid out in the US security strategy for the region. The British, Norwegian, Danish and Canadian perspectives, on the other hand, stand out as more regional in nature. Germany displays a rather low profile in its approach to international security in the Arctic, considering its economic status in Europe. France reveals a strong concern for Arctic shipping and freedom of navigation, a perspective similar to the USA's, but with less global ambition.

Decision-making processes during Norway's membership of the UNSC 2001-2002 are the empirical focus of this article. Based on anthropological fieldwork in the period, I discuss why it was necessary for practice and informal processes to be included when international organizations were being studied, but also how Norwegian UN policy was determined during the period. Furthermore, I show how formal structures are a marginalization of practical realities and how informal processes overlap formal structures on the way to consensus being achieved between member states in the UNSC. I investigate how this overlap has implications for policy-making in small states such as Norway when represented in international organizations like the UNSC. It is important to examine how formal instructions are being interpreted, adapted and reformulated through practice and informal action, and, when studying these effects, to illuminate the power relations in international politics. Adapted from the source document.

A review essay covering books by 1) Alan S. Alexandroff & Andrew F. Cooper, Rising States, Rising Institutions: Challenges for Global Governance (2010), 2) Alexander T. J. Lennon & Amanda Kozlowski, Global Powers in the 21st Century: Strategies and Relations (2008), 3) Geir Lundestad, The Rise and Decline of the American 'Empire': Power and its Limits in Comparative Perspective (2012), 4) Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World and the Rise of the Rest (2009), 5) Amrita Narlikar, New Powers: How to Become One and How to Manage Them (2010) and 6) Michael T. Klare, Rising Powers, Shrinking Planet: The New Geopolitics of Energy (2008).