The role of parliament in international relations and WTO negotiations: the case of Norway

2004 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
OLUF LANGHELLE ◽  
HILMAR ROMMETVEDT

According to traditional constitutional theory, foreign affairs is the prerogative of the executive. However, globalisation and the dual process of internationalisation of domestic affairs and domestification of international affairs imply that the days when foreign policy was the exclusive domain of the executive are over. The article explores the effects of globalisation on the role of Parliament in international relations in general, and WTO negotiations specifically, using the Norwegian Parliament as an illustration. Three findings are presented. First, at the international level attempts are made to develop a ‘parliamentary dimension of the WTO’. Second, at the national level the Norwegian Parliament has become more actively engaged in international relations. And, third, the Norwegian Parliament plays an important role in the processes of defining national interests and determining national negotiation positions in the WTO, especially with regard to possible trade-offs between the offensive interests of fisheries and the defensive interests of agriculture.

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 127
Author(s):  
Vladislav B. Sotirovic

In regard to international relations (IR), power is understood as the ability of state or other political actors to impose its own control or influence over other state(s) or other political actors, or at least to influence the outcome of events on the local, regional or global level. Power politics as a phenomena has two dimensions: internal and external. The internal dimension is applied in the inner policy of the state and the external in the foreign affairs or outside of the home politics. The powerfulness of a state depends on its real independence or sovereignty from outside influence on both formulation and realization of its own policy. The internal power is represented by the level of autonomy in the inner affairs while the external power corresponds to capacity to control the behaviour and influence from the outside in domestic affairs and to influence by itself the affairs and politics of the others. However, a majority of researchers suggest that power politics mostly means the potential capacity and practical ability to influence the behaviour of other actors in IR in accordance with its own aims calculated into the framework of public or secret national interests.


2020 ◽  
pp. 004711782092228
Author(s):  
Aaron McKeil

International relations today are widely considered to be experiencing deepening disorder and the topic of international disorder is gaining increased attention. Yet, despite this recent interest in international disorder, in and beyond the academy, and despite the decades-long interest in international order, there is still little agreement on the concept of international disorder, which is often used imprecisely and with an alarmist rather than analytical usage. This is a problem if international disorder is to be understood in theory, towards addressing its concomitant problems and effects in practice. As such, this article identifies and explores two ways international order studies can benefit from a clearer and more precise conception of international disorder. First, it enables a more complete picture of how orderly international orders have been. Second, a greater understanding of the problem of international order is illuminated by a clearer grasp of the relation between order and disorder in world politics. The article advances these arguments in three steps. First, an analytical concept of international disorder is developed and proposed. Second, applying it to the modern history of international order, the extent to which there is a generative relationship between order and disorder in international systems is explored. Third, it specifies the deepening international disorder in international affairs today. It concludes by indicating a research agenda for International Relations and international order studies that takes the role of international disorder more seriously.


2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tapio Juntunen

The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has produced a number of commentaries that have tried to grasp the crisis through the comforting lens of historical analogies. One of the most perplexing of these has been the revival of Finlandization, or the idea of the “Finnish model” as a possible solution to the Ukraine crisis. In this article I interrogate these arguments, firstly, by historicising the original process of Finlandization during the Cold War. Secondly, I argue that the renaissance of Finlandization is based on parachronistic reasoning. In other words, the Finlandization analogy has been applied to modern-day Ukraine in such a way that the alien elements of the past context are, to paraphrase Quentin Skinner, “dissolved into an apparent but misleading familiarity” in the present re-appropriation of the idea and its contextual prerequisites. Indeed, the reappearance of Finlandization in the context of the Ukraine crisis reinforces the idea that the real drivers of international affairs can be reduced to the axioms derived from the transhistorical logic of international anarchy and the iron laws of great power politics. Thus, this article makes a novel contribution to the theoretical discussion on the role of analogies and myths in International Relations.


Author(s):  
Iver B. Neumann

The diplomat is formed in certain socially specific ways, and is defined by the role they play within certain contexts in the field of international relations. Since it is human beings, and not organizations, who practice diplomacy, the diplomats’ social traits are relevant to their work. Historically, diplomats can be defined in terms of two key social traits (class and gender) and how their roles depend on two contexts (bureaucrat/information gatherer and private/public). Before the rise of the state in Europe, envoys were usually monks. With the rise of the state, the aristocracy took over the diplomatic missions. Nonaristocrats were later allowed to assume the role of diplomats, but they needed to be trained, both as gentlemen and as diplomats. From the eighteenth century onwards, wives usually accompanied diplomats stationed abroad, though by the end of the nineteenth century, a few women came to work as typists and carry out menial chores for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). As women became legal persons through performing such labor, they later became qualified to legally serve as diplomats. Meanwhile, in terms of context, the key context change for a diplomat is from “at home” (as in “my home country”) to “abroad.” Historically, work at home is the descendant of bureaucratic service at the MFA, and work abroad of the diplomatic service.


1968 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 140-154
Author(s):  
Barbee-Sue Rodman

It has been noticed by various observers that in the election campaign of 1918, which focused on the issue of “reparations” versus “indemnities,” the debate was dominated not by discussions of the practical issues of international relations, national interests, or economic possibilities, but rather by abstract moral arguments about “justice” — a “just peace” and a “just punishment” for Germany. It has not been noticed, however, that these arguments about justice were very largely carried over into international politics from the sphere of domestic criminal law, to such an extent that positions expressed vis-à-vis the Prison Acts of 1908 foreshadowed the positions expressed in foreign affairs in 1918.When, only three days after the Armistice, a parliamentary election was announced for December 14, there was little expectation that the terms of the treaty would be part of the electoral battle. It quickly became apparent, however, that despite the pre-Armistice agreement limiting German responsibility to reparations for damage done to Belgium and to the civilian population of Allied countries, there was a widespread public desire to force Germany to pay an indemnity for the entire cost of the war. Although Labour and the Asquithian Liberals refused to abandon their commitment to “reparations but no indemnity,” the Coalition leadership succumbed, though hesitantly, to popular pressure. Despite the private convictions of both David Lloyd George and Bonar Law that an indemnity would be unwise and harmful, the Coalition committed itself, before the campaign closed, to demanding the “entire cost of the War.”


Author(s):  
Andri Yunas Suryana ◽  
Andi Suwirta ◽  
Moch Eryk Kamsori

This research entitled as “Peranan Amir Machmud dalam Mempertahankan Pemerintahan Soeharto 1969-1982”. The main problem in this research is “How deep the role of Amir Machmud in maintaining Soeharto’s government 1969-1982?”. The hictorical method used in this research, that is consisting heuristic, critical sources, interpretation, and historiography. To deepen the analysis, the interdisipliner approach such as sociology and political science was used in this research, such as role, political stability, and general elections concepts also there was Patron-Client and Structuration theories. Amir Machmud was a prominent figure during Orde Baru period. Amir Machmud was born at Cibeber, Cimahi city and had successful military career during New Order era. Amir Machmud held position as minister of domestic affairs in 3 periods. As a minister, he had successfully carry on some urge problems to government, like PEPERA problem that considered as fraudulence because unappropriate based on New York agreement by international affairs.


2019 ◽  
pp. 131-148
Author(s):  
Peter Čajka

Already in the Middle Ages, in times of the first universities, education was an important source of knowledge and social status. Nowadays, education, together with its quality and level of teaching, is used as a means of pursuing national interests abroad, as well as influencing local elites, and sometimes even a larger population. High level and good quality of education is one of factors contributing to the relationship between states. The role of education as regards international prestige and the position of individual states has risen in recent years chiefly due to major changes in the global economy and a corresponding shift of values, values which have become important for the modernization of societies. Thus, education has become increasingly important, especially due to the growing significance of knowledge in the globalized world. Education has become an increasingly important factor in international relations and it translates into the soft power of a state.


Author(s):  
Daniel Pejic

The literature on cities and international relations (IR), or “global urban politics,” as it is sometimes termed, is a diverse stream of social science research that has developed in response to major demographic and economic shifts that began in second half of the 20th century and continue to today. During this time the world has witnessed dramatic globalization and urbanization, centralizing populations in cities. It is predicted that by 2050 close to 70 percent of the world’s population will live in urban areas, meaning that 21st-century challenges will be largely urban in nature. Across areas such as migration, health, environmental sustainability, and economic development, citizens and city governments are constantly exposed, and need to respond to, the impacts of globalization on cities. At the international level, multilateral organizations have recognized this shift and are increasingly involving cities, or networks of cities, as interlocutors in global forums. IR has been slow to acknowledge the increasing importance of cities in international affairs, as it conflicts with the state-centric paradigm of mainstream theory. Most early scholarship on cities and globalization came from urbanists and political economists, who studied the development of “global cities” that were acting as the critical nodes in the architecture of the world economy. This literature predominately identified cities as the sites of global processes, with limited capacity to influence or shape them. It also offered a narrow, economistic conception of cities that vastly prioritized the experiences of wealthy cities in the Global North. More recently, scholars have begun to study and theorize the role of cities as actors in global affairs, particularly through forms of networked governance and involvement in key multilateral discussions. This bibliography tracks the evolution of this research agenda from its conception to the present day. It begins with a limited background in the study of urban politics, providing a crucial framework for understanding how the diverse streams of research developed. It then details the continuing work on “global cities,” which recognized the increasing importance of cities to international affairs in the late 20th century, although largely defined in narrow economic terms. What follows is a broader theorization of the role of cities in global governance, which begins to afford some agency to cities to shape international affairs across a range of policy areas and brings them directly into the purview of IR. While most of this literature has still been driven by, and focused on, cities of the Global North, there have been efforts to broaden the geographic focus and recognize the way globalization and urbanization have been experienced differently in cities across the globe. Finally, the bibliography draws on a recent literature exploring some of the political and legal implications of this shift to the “urban century.”


2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 453-489
Author(s):  
Roland Paris

AbstractA principal theme of international relations scholarship following the Cold War was the apparent erosion of state sovereignty caused by globalization's integrative effects and the proliferation of international institutions and networks. In recent years, however, scholars have noted a reverse trend: the reassertion of traditional, or Westphalian, state sovereignty. By contrast, I highlight another recent trend that has gone largely overlooked: the reaffirmation of older “extralegal” and “organic” versions of sovereignty by three of the world's most powerful states—Russia, China, and the United States. After tracing the genealogy of these older concepts, I consider how and why they have gained prominence in the official discourse of all three countries. I also explore the implications of this shift, which not only illustrates the importance of “norm retrieval” in international affairs, but also raises questions about the foundations of international order. Contrary to Westphalian sovereignty, which emphasizes the legal equality of states and the principle of noninterference in domestic affairs, the extralegal and organic versions offer few constraints on state action. If anything, they appear to license powerful states to dominate others.


2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
pp. 363-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan D. Hyde ◽  
Elizabeth N. Saunders

AbstractA wave of recent research challenges the role of regime type in international relations. One striking takeaway is that democratic and autocratic leaders can often achieve similar levels of domestic constraint, which in many issue areas results in similar international outcomes—leading many to question traditional views of democracies as distinctive in their international relations. In this review essay, we use recent contributions in the field to build what we call a “malleable constraints” framework, in which all governments have an institutionally defined default level of domestic audience constraint that is generally higher in democracies, but leaders maintain some agency within these institutions and can strategically increase their exposure to or insulation from this constraint. Using this framework, we argue that regime type is still a crucial differentiator in international affairs even if, as recent studies suggest, democratic and autocratic leaders can sometimes be similarly constrained by domestic audiences and thus achieve similar international outcomes. This framework helps reconcile many competing claims in recent scholarship, including the puzzle of why autocracies do not strategically increase domestic audience constraint more often. Just because autocracies can engage audience constraints and democracies can escape them does not mean that they can do so with equal ease, frequency, or risk.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document