Defending Small States: Norwegian and Danish Defense Policies in the Post-Cold War Era

Saxi, Håkon Lunde

doi:10.1080/14751798.2010.534649

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…De kan utfylle og komplementere hverandre (se f.eks. Saxi, 2010aSaxi, , 2010bSaxi, , 2011. Rones (1995) viser at utfylling og samening er mulige strategier for å håndtere teorimangfold i samfunnsvitenskapene.…”

Section: Avslutningunclassified

Sikkerhetspolitikk, kultur eller økonomi? Konkurrerende forklaringer på omstillingen av Forsvaret etter den kalde krigen

Saxi

2021

Internasjonal Politikk

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I 2001 besluttet Stortinget en vesentlig endring i forsvarskonsept og en betydelig reduksjon i forsvarsstrukturen. Forsvarets hovedoppgave skulle ikke lenger være å utgjøre et mobiliseringsbasert invasjonsforsvar. Beslutningen var et brudd med forsvarskonseptet som hadde dominert norsk forsvarsplanlegging under den kalde krigen og i tiåret som fulgte. Hvorfor ble invasjonsforsvaret forlatt, og hva ble Forsvarets nye hovedoppgave? Artikkelen argumenterer for at det finnes tre dominerende og delvis konkurrerende forklaringer på omleggingen av Forsvaret: en sikkerhetspolitisk, en kulturell og en økonomisk. Den første tilnærmingen ser beslutningen som drevet av et ønske om å bidra mer i utenlandsoperasjoner for å bli oppfattet som en «god alliert» i NATO og USA. Den andre forklarer overgangen med en kulturell endring der en ny og mer «internasjonalisert» forsvarspolitisks diskurs vant frem blant norske beslutningstakere. Den tredje ser endringen som et uunngåelig resultat av invasjonsforsvarets manglende økonomiske bærekraft. Abstract in English:Security Policy, Culture or Defence Economics? Competing Explanations for the Transformation of the Norwegian Armed Forces after the Cold WarIn 2001, the Storting – Norway’s parliament – decided on a significant change in Norway’s national defence concept and a significant reduction in the defence structure. The Armed Forces’ main task should no longer be to constitute a mobilization-based territorial defence force. The decision was a break with the defence concept that had dominated Norwegian defence planning during the Cold War and in the decade that followed. Why was territorial defence abandoned, and what became the Armed Forces’ new main task? The article argues that there are three dominant and partly competing explanations for the transformation of the Armed Forces: a security policy explanation, a cultural explanation and an economic explanation. The first approach sees the decision as driven by a desire to contribute more in international operations in order to be perceived as a “good ally” in NATO and the United States. The second explains the transformation with cultural changes among Norwegian decision-makers, through which a new and more “internationalized” defence policy discourse became dominant. The third sees the change as the inevitable result of the financial unsustainability of the old status quo in the Armed Forces.

show abstract

Section: Avslutningunclassified

Sikkerhetspolitikk, kultur eller økonomi? Konkurrerende forklaringer på omstillingen av Forsvaret etter den kalde krigen

Saxi

2021

Internasjonal Politikk

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a few years, Denmark effectively transformed itself from what was often considered the weakest link in NATO to a Nordic and European defence policy avant garde . Denmark sent combat forces abroad and reformed its defence forces “[e]ven before the new security environment had been fully realised”, and the goal of taking full advantage of the new security environment was shared by foreign policy makers as well as the Danish Armed Forces, who “enthusiastically embraced expeditionary military operations as the new sine qua non , and pushed actively for greater professionalization and internationalization of the Services” (Saxi, : 416). The events of 11 September 2001 accelerated this development.…”

Section: The Warmonger? the Military Road To A Peaceful Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Danish defence was transformed into a two‐tier system focused on internationally deployable forces combined with “total defence” aimed at preventing terrorist attacks on Denmark and cushioning Danish society from the consequences should that happen (Heurlin, : 71–72). Territorial defence forces were finally abolished in 2004, and conscription was reduced to four months, now served primarily as a means to education in total defence and as a recruiting channel for the professional forces (Saxi, : 417).…”

Section: The Warmonger? the Military Road To A Peaceful Worldmentioning

confidence: 99%

From Peacemaker to Warmonger? Explaining Denmark's Great Power Politics

Wivel

2013

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Danish post-Cold War security policy is typically portrayed as a transformation from an anti-militaristic and multilateralist member of a Nordic bloc in international relations promoting international solidarity and global peace into an activist proponent of a liberal world order to be defended by military means when necessary. Focusing on Danish peace policy, this article puts forward a contending analysis arguing that what appears as change entails a considerable amount of continuity. Now, as in the past, the Danish contribution to international peace reflects a combination of international demand and the ability and willingness of Danish policy-makers to meet this demand in accordance with their liberal-egalitarian values and pragmatic approach to international relations.

show abstract

“…Recent research into defence and military planning in small states has included studies based on specific aspects of force and capability developmentsuch as the procurement focus of Stefan Markowski, Peter Hall and Robert Wylie's (2010) work on defence procurement and industry policy -and the analysis of how small states apply modern military concepts such as the revolution in military affairs (as developed in the work of Francis Domingo (2014), Tim Huxley (2004), Bernard Loo (2009b) and Michael ). This is complemented by consideration of the form and effect of small state defence policies (as shown by Håkon Lunde Saxi's (2010aSaxi's ( , 2010b comparative analysis of Norwegian and Danish defence policies); with additional studies further considering the role of small states in current operations 1 and how they may develop their capabilities through innovation and development 2 . In addition to the issue focused nature of this research, a further form of research comprises studies of selected small states, such as Shang-su Wu's (2016) analysis of the defence capabilities of Singapore and Taiwan, that examine how these states provide for their security and defence.…”

Section: Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Military force structures in small states: Providing for relevant and credible military capability

Bennett¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p>Small states are perceived as lacking military power. Nevertheless, most maintain military forces. Given their shortfalls in power and capacity what choices do small states make about maintaining military forces and what utility do they gain from them? This issue is not well addressed in small state literature which considers the security of small states but focuses less on their defence planning or the military instruments they maintain. This thesis addresses that issue by examining how small states structure their military forces, why they do so, and whether they provide for relevant and credible military capabilities. This is achieved by examining the structural balance of small state military forces; developing and applying a methodology to describe the process and priorities within the military systems of small states; and developing expectations for military forces in small states from small state literature and military theory as testable propositions to provide a basis for comparison of their military capabilities. The results of this comparison are then analysed with regard to the utility that small states may gain from their military forces and related to wider themes within the field of small state studies to ascertain the benefit that they may gain from them. Four cases of small state military force structures are used. Ireland provides limited military capabilities to meet discrete tasks and roles within a benign strategic environment and its policy of military neutrality. New Zealand, like Ireland, does not face a direct military threat but it has a wide range of security interests. This is reflected in a broad force structure, albeit with modest capabilities based on utility and the benefits of its international partnerships. Norway, on the other hand, does perceive a direct military threat and functions within the NATO security alliance. It maintains forces that are able to operate throughout the conflict continuum as part of the NATO framework but, as a small member of the alliance, it faces the challenges of balancing defence concerns within the alliance framework. Singapore also perceives itself to be strategically and militarily vulnerable. However, unlike Norway, it does not participate in a military alliance and instead provides the most capable military forces of the four cases as it aims to be self-reliant in the face of perceived vulnerability. The four cases possess markedly different military force structures as a result of their varying assessments of strategic discretion and differences in their approaches to the various security environments they encounter. All four face challenges with economies of scale, critical mass and fixed costs in providing for their military capabilities. However, the extent of these challenges differs between each of the four cases and they gain different utility and benefit from maintaining their military instruments. Hence while small states have some common military characteristics they cannot be considered as a homogenous group. This should affect the manner in which they, other states and international organisations perceive them.</p>

show abstract

Defending Small States: Norwegian and Danish Defense Policies in the Post-Cold War Era

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Sikkerhetspolitikk, kultur eller økonomi? Konkurrerende forklaringer på omstillingen av Forsvaret etter den kalde krigen

Sikkerhetspolitikk, kultur eller økonomi? Konkurrerende forklaringer på omstillingen av Forsvaret etter den kalde krigen

From Peacemaker to Warmonger? Explaining Denmark's Great Power Politics

Military force structures in small states: Providing for relevant and credible military capability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About