• English
    • norsk
  • English 
    • English
    • norsk
  • Login
View Item 
  •   All institutions
  • Forsvarets høgskole
  • Masteroppgaver
  • Forsvarets høgskole
  • View Item
  •   All institutions
  • Forsvarets høgskole
  • Masteroppgaver
  • Forsvarets høgskole
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Helhetlig tilnærming – krisehåndteringens universalklister?: En komparativ studie av konseptene til FN, NATO og EU og deres mulige påvirkning på norsk politisk styring

Kristiansen, Dag
Master thesis
Thumbnail
View/Open
Kristiansen Dag.pdf (749.3Kb)
Permanent link
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/99960
Issue date
2009
Share
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Forsvarets høgskole [239]
Abstract
In this thesis I set out to study the possible influence of decisions taken in international

organisations, on political decisions in member state governments. The main idea behind this is

that members of an international organisation need to follow the decisions agreed upon in the

same organisation, if a comprehensive approach is to be successfully executed.

To do this, I first compared the concepts of comprehensive approach as they appear in UN,

NATO and EU in the spring of 2009. I defined that the degree of cohesion in execution could be

predisposed by the degree of influence member states had on the decision making process, and

by the way the execution was financed. If member states had a low degree of influence on

decisions, and execution was financed indirectly by member states, cohesion could be rather low.

The highest degree of cohesion would be found where influence was high, and if execution was

financed directly by the organisations own budget.

My next step was to find out which resources the organisation could form up itself, and which

resources they were dependent on to coordinate with other actors. My view was that cohesion

would be higher if the resources needed came from within the organisation. With these

standards, EU came out on top, with a high degree of member states’ influence on decisions,

direct financing of civilian operations and a diversity of resources within all instruments of

power. UN, with its low outcome on member states’ influence on decisions, particularly in the

Security Council, had a less positive cohesion in execution. NATO came out with the lowest

score on cohesion, since they were dependent on a number of external actors to be truly

comprehensive.

Based on this, I looked at how the Norwegian government fulfilled its commitments on decisions

taken in UN and NATO, based on Norwegian development aid and military contributions to

Afghanistan in 2005 and 2008. Norway fulfilled all its obligations, except one, UN’s appeal for

training of the Afghan Army in 2005.

My main conclusion in this thesis is that national governments may be influenced by decisions

taken in international organisations of which they are members. This is based on the fact that the

Norwegian government followed the requests from UN and NATO in 2005 and 2008, in all but

one request. Hence, this may be the case for other governments too. And in my world,

governments need to do so, if a comprehensive approach in international crises management

shall be anything but a panacea to be toasted for in political principal speeches.
Publisher
Forsvarets høgskole

Contact Us

Search NORA
Powered by DSpace software

Service from BIBSYS
 

 

Browse this CollectionIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsBrowse all ArchivesArchives & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

Google Analytics StatisticsView Usage Statistics

Contact Us

Search NORA
Powered by DSpace software

Service from BIBSYS