Publications
Status and sovereign equality: Small states in multilateral settings
In this chapter, we explore Norwegian UN policy, arguing that it is a central arena for Norwegian efforts to be recognized by others. Our focus on Norwegian UN policy is not an end in itself, but a means to develop a more general argument about status seeking behaviour in a multilateral setting. We argue that status seeking in multilateral settings is distinct from status seeking in other settings, and that this stems from the norms of reciprocity and rulebased cooperation in such settings. Multilateral settings put a premium on behaviour that is in keeping with a commitment to the furtherance and expansion of the rules established by multilateral cooperation and organizations. Certain types of behaviour or role, rather than certain types of resources, can accord status. Norway has specialized in one distinct ‘role’: that of being a team-player, a facilitator – an actor that can be relied upon to take on the burden of doing things in which it has no identifiable direct stake or interest. A case in point is the UN request as to whether Norway could shoulder the responsibility for destroying Syria’s chemical weapons. We conclude the chapter by suggesting that the role developed in multilateral settings has so pervaded Norwegian diplomatic tradition that it is present in bilateral settings as well. We proceed as follows. We first elaborate briefly on the editors’ introduction and highlight how status seeking is reflected in the skills and diplomatic forms that are valued in different settings. We then briefly describe overall Norway’s UN policy, with a few examples of what a status-based reading of this policy can tell us about Norwegian foreign policy, and about multilateralism as a distinct arena for status seeking. Next, we present the specific manifestations of their distinctiveness of multilateral settings, and link this to Norwegian diplomats’ self-understandings and conceptions of what characterizes a good diplomat: the ability to be tapped into what is going on in an effort to present oneself with resources that can be put to good use on issues in which Norway may often not have any distinct or direct stakes. This tendency to stress the role as ‘helper’ is most pronounced in relation to issue-areas where the USA has vital interests, and is less so where less powerful states are concerned. Thus, power differentials play a central role also in multilateral settings, where it matters who is the demandeur for the tasks to be undertaken.
Hva var Norge i det danske imperiet? Skottland og Norge som semi-sentra
Denne artikkelen handler om Skottlands og Norges roller som politiske enheter i henholdsvis det britiske og danske imperiet. I artikkelens første del er argumentet at «semi-sentrum» er en nyttig ny analysekategori for å forstå de strukturelle posisjonene en politisk enhet kan inneha i et imperialt system. Eksisterende strukturelle imperiemodeller fokuserer på relasjoner mellom et imperiesentrum og periferier. Disse modellene har problemer med å forklare politiske enheter som innehar kjennetegn ved begge – både sentrum og periferi. Det nye begrepet semi-sentrum kan forklare imperiedynamikker på en bedre måte, empirisk illustrert i artikkelens andre del som undersøker Skottlands og Norges roller innen sine respektive imperier. Spesielt relevant for dette spesialnummeret er hvordan man ved å se Norges rolle som semi-sentrum kan kaste nytt lys på embedsmennenes sentrale rolle i det nye Norge etter 1814, samt hvordan sammenligningen med Skottland utvider det komparative universet for den nye norske statsdannelsen i etterkant av en imperieoppløsning.
“Sin mujeres por aquí”. Discursos de género en las Operaciones de Paz de Naciones Unidas = “There are no women here”. Gender Discourses i...
From ‘forces for good’ to ‘forces for status'?: Small state military status-seeking
In the field of security and defencece states seek and maintain status internationally and political support nationally by pursuing a competitive defence policy through defence procurement and military contributions to international peacekeeping and military operations. Status is here understood as issue-specific and relational, which means that which military ‘hardware’ gives status is contextual and may change over time. Whereas the literature has tended to focus on the status-seeking of great powers, this chapter focuses on small powers. Drawing on the case of Norway it asks: To what extent have troop contributions and procurement policy been sought converted into status? How has status-seeking or status-driven activity in this field been communicated to domestic and international audiences, and with what results? Is status within defence compatible with the ‘soft-power’ status that Norway holds in development aid and peace facilitation – or might it jeopardize the latter? The chapter shows how also small states use ‘hard’ capabilities and resources in status-seeking activities internationally and vis-à-vis central allies. Although a competitive defence policy is important for status-seeking and can enhance the status of small states that have resources, status trade-offs in other policy fields should also be expected.
Om NUPI
Informasjonsbrosjyre om NUPIs virksomhet og forskningsområder. Forskningsområdene dekker hovedområdene Konflikt, sikkerhet og risiko, økonomi, vekst og utvikling, og diplomati og global styring.Nøkkeltall basert på årsmelding 2013.
nupi.no
Nytt nupi.no har blitt utviklet i 2014. Websidene inneholder informasjon om NUPIs forskningstemaer, publikasjoner, forskere, prosjekter, arrangementer, mm.
Capable Companies or changing markets? Explaining the export performance of firms in the defence industry