行动自由的局限:不对称双边外交中的斯堪的纳维亚国家

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Internasjonal Politikk Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.23865/intpol.v80.3078
Hans Mouritzen
{"title":"行动自由的局限:不对称双边外交中的斯堪的纳维亚国家","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

双边外交不是斯堪的纳维亚人最喜欢的运动,但在当今世界,它已变得越来越重要。本书分析了许多案例,在这些案例中,斯堪的纳维亚国家受到大国(俄罗斯、中国、印度和美国)的双边“惩戒”。与冷战后美国单极和欧盟规范权力的前15年相比,斯堪的纳维亚人的行动自由(行动空间)已经缩小。在不付出巨大代价的情况下,基于普遍价值观批评大国已不再可能。总的来说,决策者不超越国家的行动自由是至关重要的。但另一方面,他们也不应该顺从,不应该停止偶尔挑战它的极限,考虑到他们的国内舞台。“堡垒”应该得到可信的解释和捍卫。行动空间的限制很难辨别,但尝试气球,与相关国家平行行动,或“过去的教训”可能会有所帮助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Grænser for handlefrihed: Skandinaviske stater i asymmetrisk bilateralt diplomati
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
50.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
25 weeks
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.
期刊最新文献
Innenfor eller utenfor: Rammene for arbeidslivspolitikk ved ulike EU-tilknytninger Landbruks- og fiskerinæringene i Norge: Klart utenfor, men stadig mer innenfor EU? EUs utenriks- og sikkerhetspolitikk og implikasjoner for Norge Norge og EU: Betydningen av medlemskap I blindsonen av norsk EU-debatt: EUs helseberedskap i kjølvannet av koronapandemien
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1