Filippinane, ASEAN og klimaendringar
Kva oppnådde Filippinane då dei hadde formannskapet i ASEAN i 2017? Og kva utfordringar skaper klimaendringar for ASEAN-landa?
Vitenskap, teknologi og fremtidens krigføring
Hvordan er teknologi med på å endre hvordan vi ser på verden og hvordan vi skal handle i den?...
Kva har Brexit å seie for Norden?
Storbritannias avgjerd om å trekkje seg ut av EU i 2016 markerte eit skilje i historia om europeisk integrasjon. Kva betyr Brexit for dei nordiske landa?
New Diplomacy
New diplomacy is a term which has been used both politically and analytically since the French Revolution. It was introduced as a positive contrast to the old diplomacy of kings and intrigues, and was concerned primarily with trade. Such a liberal understanding has remained predominant – new diplomacy has typically been associated with democratic control over diplomacy, international organization, and free trade, and with openness and honesty in diplomatic practice. An alternative radical interpretation, where new diplomacy implied the complete overthrow of the old, can trace its roots to the French Revolution, and was expressed fully during the Russian Revolution. Although new diplomacy has also been used as a term of abuse by those who prefer traditional forms of diplomacy, the term has primarily signified an ongoing or desired change in a positive direction. Currently, it is being used as a label for most of the non‐state‐centric diplomacy.
Old diplomacy
Old diplomacy is a term which has been used both politically and analytically since the French Revolution. Politically, it emerged as a term of abuse, used to criticize all which had been wrong with interstate interaction before 1789, in particular secrecy, duplicity, and the reliance on aristocracy. Thus, it was often contrasted with a desired new diplomacy. Political versions of the term have persisted until the present day, although the target changed. A particular spike in criticism happened in 1918–20, when old diplomacy was blamed for the outbreak of the Great War. Analytically, old diplomacy has been used to refer more neutrally to earlier forms of diplomacy. This usage emerged in the nineteenth century, but has been more prevalent from the middle of the twentieth century.
Teheran. Revolusjon og reaksjon.
Temaet for kapitlet er Teherans rolle og betydning i et Midtøsten i endring og konflikt. Jeg ser byen som brennpunkt for tre store slag som står i regionen: kampene over Vestens rolle, folkets makt over politiske avgjørelser og islam som samfunnskontrakt. Jeg viser hvordan kampene spilles ut i Teheran, og hvordan de speiler Irans utfordringer som regional makt. Kapitlet drøfter forholdet mellom innen- og utenrikspolitikk og tar konflikten med Saudi-Arabia som eksempel.
Autocratic legitimation in Iran: Ali Khamenei's discourse on regime 'insiders' and 'outsiders'
The article analyses Ali Khamenei’s discourse on insiders and outsiders in the Islamic Republic of Iran, arguing that it shows the leader of an electoral revolutionary regime striving to counter elite fragmentation and growing democratic demands. It studies identity demarcation as a tool of autocratic legitimation. In a political system where the possibility to access political positions depends on supporting a belief-system, all cadres share a basic identity, which rulers can exploit to draw boundaries between “us” and “them”. The analysis reveals how Iran’s leader capitalizes on the existence of an insider-outsider divide to promote ideas about an imagined “we” of the regime. The “we” is portrayed as an Islamic we, fully committed to his rule. The article maintains that Khamenei developed this discourse in response to the challenge of the Iranian reform movement. It analyses, first, the context in which the discourse emerged and, second, the discursive strategy itself, to substantiate the claim. It concludes that the discourse had two essential aims in the containment (1997–2003) and crushing (2009–2010) of the pro-democracy reformist and Green movements: to de-legitimate Khamenei’s opponents through othering and to legitimate the counter-mobilization of repressive agents.
Temanummer om «diplomatiminister Brende»
Hva sitter vi igjen med etter fire år med Børge Brende som utenriksminister? spør forskere i Internasjonal Politikk.