Nordic responses to Brexit:Making the best of a difficult situation

This policy brief examines how the British decision to withdraw from the EU has influenced the political debates in and foreign policies of the five Nordic states – Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. With the exception of Iceland, all these countries had a stated preference for Britain to remain in the EU – not least due to historical ties and the tendency of Britain and the Nordic countries to have similar approaches to European integration. Three general findings can be highlighted: First, Brexit has featured prominently in political debates in all the Nordic countries since the British referendum, and the causes and consequences of the Brexit vote continue to be discussed with vigour. In all the Nordic countries, Brexit has also stirred debates about their current relationships with the EU, prompting EU critics to demand new privileges or opt-outs. Overall, however, the Nordic governments, supported by a stable majority among their populations, have signalled that they wish to preserve their EU membership or current forms of association models, with the access and benefits these provide. Second, for all the Nordic countries, securing good relations with Britain post-Brexit is a key priority, but they have generally indicated that maintaining good relations with the EU must come first. Finally, the Nordic governments are well aware that Brexit could create a vacuum in EU policy-making, perhaps tipping the balance among internal clusters. Britain has been a highly visible member of the ‘Northern’ grouping in the EU, and its absence is likely to be noticed. As the Nordic countries are about to lose what has at times been a powerful ally in EU decision-making, they may have to forge new coalitions to safeguard their interests

Nordic partnership choices in a fierier security environment: Towards more alignment

Nordic states’ partnership choices in security and defence are more aligned than they were a decade ago. When Danish, Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish government officials now identify key security challenges and partners, and reflect on the potential for Nordic cooperation, they have the same reference points and use similar wording. Since 2014, the toolbox for Nordic defence cooperation has also solidified and different formal affiliations with NATO and the EU seem to matter less than before. Furthermore, an array of multi- and minilateral cooperation structures have emerged across and beyond the EU and NATO, expanding the possibilities for Nordic cooperation under a larger Euro-Atlantic umbrella. However, two limitations remain: First, Nordic security and defence cooperation still remains subordinate to and a supplement rather than an alternative to NATO. Second, putting Nordic response mechanisms into practice remains dependent not only on the context and issue at stake, but also on the political appetite of the individual Nordic governments to choose a Nordic solution.publishedVersio

Hva betyr brexit for utenforlandet Norge?

Storbritannia er på vei ut av EU. Hva betyr det for utenforlandet Norge? Siden folkeavstemningen 23. juni i fjor, har Europa fulgt den britiske regjeringens signaler og veivalg nøye. Når 28 EU-land blir til 27 vil det ikke bare forskyve maktbalansen innad i EU, men også mellom EU og utenforlandene, og blant landene i den brokete forsamlingen av europeiske tredjeland. Storbritannias uttreden vil merkes, både i og utenfor EU. I denne artikkelen ser jeg nærmere på hvordan Storbritannias EU-uttreden vil påvirke norsk utenriks- og europapolitikk. Første del av artikkelen gjennomgår hovedtrekkene i Norges forhold til EU og debatten rundt norsk EU- og EØS-tilknytning, før jeg introduserer Brexit som et brytningspunkt. I andre del studerer jeg norske medier og politikeres fremstilling av Brexit og konsekvensene for norsk utenriks- og europapolitikk, og presenterer hovedsporene i den norske regjeringens Brexit-arbeid. Avslutningsvis diskuterer jeg hvordan Storbritannias EU-sorti vil påvirke Norges europapolitikk i bred forstand, Norges EØS-/EFTA-tilknytning og det bilaterale forholdet til Storbritannia

Diplomacy through the back door: Norway and the bilateral route to EU decision-making

This article examines how Norway, a veteran EU outsider by choice, works on a day-to-day basis to compensate for its lack of formal voice in EU institutions. After Norwegian voters' second rejection of EU membership in a national referendum in 1994, Prime Minister Brundtland observed that Norway now must be prepared to use “the back door” to reach EU policy-makers. I suggest that for Norway, a key alternative route to the EU decision-making table has gone through bilateral partnerships. I identify two chief variants of this bilateral trajectory, what I term long-term and rotating bilateralism. Firstly, Norway has pursued long-term ties with selected bilateral partners within the EU system. Secondly, it has systematically strengthened its diplomatic presence in the member state holding or about to take over the rotating presidency of the EU Council. I conclude with some reflections on the relevance of Norway's “bilateral experience” for Britain, as a future EU outsider

Diplomacy through the back door: Norway and the bilateral route to EU decision-making

This article examines how Norway, a veteran EU outsider by choice, works on a day-to-day basis to compensate for its lack of formal voice in EU institutions. After Norwegian voters' second rejection of EU membership in a national referendum in 1994, Prime Minister Brundtland observed that Norway now must be prepared to use “the back door” to reach EU policy-makers. I suggest that for Norway, a key alternative route to the EU decision-making table has gone through bilateral partnerships. I identify two chief variants of this bilateral trajectory, what I term long-term and rotating bilateralism. Firstly, Norway has pursued long-term ties with selected bilateral partners within the EU system. Secondly, it has systematically strengthened its diplomatic presence in the member state holding or about to take over the rotating presidency of the EU Council. I conclude with some reflections on the relevance of Norway's “bilateral experience” for Britain, as a future EU outsider

Hva betyr brexit for utenforlandet Norge?

Storbritannia er på vei ut av EU. Hva betyr det for utenforlandet Norge? Siden folkeavstemningen 23. juni i fjor, har Europa fulgt den britiske regjeringens signaler og veivalg nøye. Når 28 EU-land blir til 27 vil det ikke bare forskyve maktbalansen innad i EU, men også mellom EU og utenforlandene, og blant landene i den brokete forsamlingen av europeiske tredjeland. Storbritannias uttreden vil merkes, både i og utenfor EU. I denne artikkelen ser jeg nærmere på hvordan Storbritannias EU-uttreden vil påvirke norsk utenriks- og europapolitikk. Første del av artikkelen gjennomgår hovedtrekkene i Norges forhold til EU og debatten rundt norsk EU- og EØS-tilknytning, før jeg introduserer Brexit som et brytningspunkt. I andre del studerer jeg norske medier og politikeres fremstilling av Brexit og konsekvensene for norsk utenriks- og europapolitikk, og presenterer hovedsporene i den norske regjeringens Brexit-arbeid. Avslutningsvis diskuterer jeg hvordan Storbritannias EU-sorti vil påvirke Norges europapolitikk i bred forstand, Norges EØS-/EFTA-tilknytning og det bilaterale forholdet til Storbritannia

Verden i endring, diplomati i fatning

De siste tiårene har globalisering og digitalisering gjort verden mindre. «Langt borte eksisterer ikke lenger», som tidligere utenriksminister Thorvald Stoltenberg en gang fastslo. Skillet mellom «der ute» og «her hjemme» er blitt vanskeligere å trekke opp; oppfatningen av hva som naturlig hører til i den utenrikspolitiske og diplomatiske sfæren er i endring. Denne utviklingen – og vår forståelse av den – har konsekvenser for hvordan norsk utenrikspolitikk og diplomati tenkes, utformes og praktiseres

Strategic Adaption or Identity Change? : An analysis of Britain's Approach to the ESDP 1998-2004

In this working paper, Kristin Marie Haugevik seeks to analyse the nature of the changes in Britain’s approach to the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) after 1998. Ever since the beginning of the European integration process in 1951, Britain’s approach to European security and defence cooperation has been characterized by anti-federalism and transatlanticism. Hence, it was unexpected when Tony Blair, together with Jacques Chirac, took the initiative to frame a common security and defence policy for the EU in Saint Malo in 1998. This paper discusses to what extent Britain’s new approach to the ESDP after 1998 can be explained as the result of a strategic adaptation, and to what extent it can be seen as a result of more profound changes in the British identity and security interests. These two accounts are tested by analysing Britain’s approach to some of the most important ESDP documents since 1998: the Saint Malo declaration, the Laeken declaration, the Nice Treaty, the European Security Strategy, and the Constitution Treat