{"title":"Grænser for handlefrihed: Skandinaviske stater i asymmetrisk bilateralt diplomati","authors":"Hans Mouritzen","doi":"10.23865/intpol.v80.3078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"in English Limits to action space: Scandinavians in bilateral diplomacy Bilateral diplomacy is not a Scandinavian favourite sport, but it has become increasingly important in today’s world. A number of cases are analysed, in which Scandinavian countries have been “disciplined” bilaterally by great powers (Russia, China, India and the US). Compared to the first 15 years, roughly, after the Cold War, with American unipolarity and EU normative power, the Scandinavians have seen a narrowing of their freedom of manoeuvre (action space). It is no longer possible, without significant costs, to criticise great powers based on universal values. In general, it is crucial for decisionmakers not to overstep their state’s freedom of manoeuvre. But on the other hand, they should not be docile and desist from occasionally challenging its limits, also considering their domestic arena. “Bastions” should be credibly construed and defended. The limits of action space are difficult to discern, but trial balloons, parallel action with related countries, or “lessons of the past” could be helpful.","PeriodicalId":42131,"journal":{"name":"Internasjonal Politikk","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internasjonal Politikk","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23865/intpol.v80.3078","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
in English Limits to action space: Scandinavians in bilateral diplomacy Bilateral diplomacy is not a Scandinavian favourite sport, but it has become increasingly important in today’s world. A number of cases are analysed, in which Scandinavian countries have been “disciplined” bilaterally by great powers (Russia, China, India and the US). Compared to the first 15 years, roughly, after the Cold War, with American unipolarity and EU normative power, the Scandinavians have seen a narrowing of their freedom of manoeuvre (action space). It is no longer possible, without significant costs, to criticise great powers based on universal values. In general, it is crucial for decisionmakers not to overstep their state’s freedom of manoeuvre. But on the other hand, they should not be docile and desist from occasionally challenging its limits, also considering their domestic arena. “Bastions” should be credibly construed and defended. The limits of action space are difficult to discern, but trial balloons, parallel action with related countries, or “lessons of the past” could be helpful.
期刊介绍:
Fagartiklene i dette nummeret illustrerer på fin måte bredden i fagfeltet internasjonal politikk. Øystein Jensens artikkel om kontinentalsokkelens avgrensning i nord tar opp et helt sentralt emne i den dagsaktuelle norske utenrikspolitikken, norsk nordområdepolitikk. Koblingen mellom folkerett og naturressurser finner vi enda klarere uttrykt i Hans Morten Haugens artikkel, selv om det geografiske nedslagsfeltet her er Vest-Sahara, ikke Norge. I sin artikkel om Malteserordenen som ikke-territoriell politisk aktør presenterer Douglas Brommesson en empirisk inngang til debattene om "den nye middelalderen". Samlet illustrerer disse tre artiklene hvordan analyser som tangerer fag som historie og folkerett gir nye perspektiver til fagfeltet internasjonal politikk.