تجزیه و تحلیل نقش کنش گری انطباق پذیر لیبرال - غربی در سیاست خارجی دانمارک در دوران جدید (2000 تا 2020)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار گروه علوم سیاسی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران.

چکیده

در دو دهۀ اخیر، دانمارک در بین کشور‏‏های ‏‏«نوردیک» و همچنین اتحادیۀ اروپا در کنار انگلستان و لهستان، بیشترین جهت‌گیری غربی _ آمریکایی را داشته است و مبنای اصلی کنشگری فعال این کشور در حوزۀ سیاست خارجی، حضور و مشارکت حداکثری در ائتلاف‏‏های ‏‏آمریکایی _ غربی در نظام بین‌الملل است. بر همین اساس مقالۀ حاضر این پرسش را مطرح می‏کند که «مدل اصلی و دلایل سیاست‌گذارانۀ جهت‌گیری‏‏‏های ‏‏غربی _ آمریکایی در سیاست خارجی دانمارک چیست؟». در پاسخ به پرسش پژوهش، مقاله بر این فرض تأکید می‏کند که حاکم شدن احزاب لیبرال بر فرایندهای ‏‏تصمیم‌گیری سیاست داخلی و خارجی دانمارک در تقابل با هنجار‏‏های ‏‏کلاسیک احزاب سوسیال _ دموکرات چپ در یک رویۀ تاریخی، به‌خصوص بعد از دهۀ 2000، باعث گزینش رویکرد انطباقی _ کنشگرایانۀ فعال در نظام بین‌الملل بر مبنای اتحاد و ائتلاف حداکثری با ایالات‌متحده شده است. گزینش این رویکرد در تقابل با رویکرد‏‏های ‏‏کلاسیک کنش‌پذیری انفعالی _ انطباقی جنگ سرد و کنشگری فعال انترناسیونالیستی بعد از آن در سیاست خارجی دانمارک بوده است. روش مقاله مبتنی بر واکاوی کیفی و تجزیه و تحلیل قواعد شناختی حاکم بر سیاست خارجی دانمارک در یک پس‌زمینۀ نظری_تاریخی است.
 
 
 

تازه های تحقیق

 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

An Analysis of the Role of compatible Liberal -Western orientation in Danish Foreign Policy in the new era(from 2000 to 2020)

نویسنده [English]

  • Arash Beidollahkhani
Assistant Professor of Political Science, Faculty of law and Political science, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The main purpose of this article is to analyze the principle and cognition of Danish foreign policy in a historical perspective. In modern times, Denmark has had the most Western-American orientation among the Nordic countries, as well as the European Union, along with the United Kingdom and Poland, and its main basis for activism foreign policy is maximum presence and participation in American-Western alliances in international system. The main question of this research is based on the morphology of the trends which lead Danish foreign policy and its decision-making processes. Accordingly, the article raises the question of what are the main model and policy-making reasons for the West-American orientation in Danish foreign policy. In response to the research question, the article emphasizes that the ruling of liberal parties in Danish domestic and foreign policy decision-making processes in contrast to the classical norms of the Left Social Democrats in a historical perspective, especially after the 2000s, leads  Denmark to choose an adaptive-activist approach in the international system and it is based on maximum alliance with the United States. This approach is contrasts with the classical approaches of passive-adaptive foreign policy during the Cold War era and it is also contradictory with Internationalism in Danish foreign policy after the Cold war. The method of the paper is based on qualitative analysis and examine of the cognitive rules which lead Danish foreign policy in a theoretical-historical background.
 
 
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Denmark
  • Foreign Policy
  • adaptation
  • Europe
  • America
  • محمدنیا، مهدی (1395). مهاجرت و رادیکالیسم در اتحادیۀ اروپا. فصلنامه روابط خارجی، 8(2)، 57-86.
  • Agius, C. (2013). Performing identity: The Danish cartoon crisis and discourses of identity and security. Security Dialogue, 44(3), 241–258. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0967010613485871
  • Bergman, A. (2007). Co-constitution of domestic and international welfare obligations: The case of Sweden’s social democratically inspired internationalism. Cooperation and Conflict, 42, 73–99.
  • Campbell, John ,L. & Hall, J. A. & Pedersen, Ove K. (2006). National Identity And the Varieties of Capitalism: The Danish Experience. Montreal: McGill–Queen's University Press.
  •  Doeser, F. (2011). Domestic politics and foreign policy change in small states: The fall of the Danish ‘footnote policy’. Cooperation and Conflict, 46(2), 222–241. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0010836711406417.
  • Doeser, F. (2013). Leader-driven foreign-policy change: Denmark and the Persian Gulf War. International Political Science Review, 34(5), 582–597. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0192512112473027.
  • Due-Nielsen, C. & Petersen, N. (1995). Denmark’s foreign policy since 1967: An introduction. In: Due-Nielsen C and Petersen N (eds) Adaptation and Activism: The Foreign Policy of Denmark. Copenhagen: DJØF Publishing, 11–55.
  • Gram-Skjoldager, K. (2019). Denmark during the First World War: Neutral policy, economy and culture. Journal of Modern European History, 17(2), 234–250. https://doi.org/10. 1177/ 16118944 19835753.
  •  Holm, H-H. (2002). Danish foreign policy activism: The rise and decline. Danish Foreign Policy. Yearbook 2002. Copenhagen: DUPI, 19–45.
  • Jakobsen,P.V. &Ringsmose, J. (2015). Size and reputation – why the USA has valued its ‘special relationships’ with Denmark and the UK differently since 9/11. Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 13(2), 135-153. DOI: 10. 1080/14794012. 2015. 1022370
  • Kaarbo, J. & Cantir, C. (2013). Role conflict in recent wars: Danish and Dutch debates over Iraq and Afghanistan. Cooperation and Conflict, 48(4), 465–483. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0010836713482815.
  • Larsen, H. (2020). Foreign Policy New Directions in a Changing World Order? in Christiansen. P, M. , Elklit, J. , & Nedergaard, P,. (Eds) The Oxford Handbook of Danish Politics. Oxford university press. DOI:10. 1093/oxfordhb/9780198833598. 013. 27. pp: 470-487.
  • Larsen, H. (2014). Discourses of state identity and post-Lisbon national foreign policy: The case of Denmark. Cooperation and Conflict, 49(3), 368–385. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0010836713495000.
  • Larsen, H. (2009). Danish Foreign Policy and the Balance between the EU and the US: The Choice between Brussels and Washington after 2001. Cooperation and Conflict, 44(2), 209–230.
  • Lawler, P. (2007). Janus-Faced Solidarity: Danish Internationalism Reconsidered. Cooperation and Conflict, 42(1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10. 1177/0010836707073478
  • Lunde Saxi, H. (2010). Defending Small States: Norwegian and Danish Defense Policies in the Post-Cold War Era. Defense & Security Analysis, 26(4), 415-430. DOI: 10. 1080/14751798. 2010. 534649.
  • Manners, I. (2008). De danske forbehold over for den Europæiske Union: Udviklingen siden 2000. Institut for Internationale Studier / Dansk Center for Internationale Studier og Menneskerettigheder. http:// www.eu-oplysningen.dk/upload/application/pdf/4e897952/DIIS2.Pdf
  • Mariager, R. & Wivel ,A. (2019). Denmark at war: great power politics and domestic action space in the cases of Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq. In Fisher, Kristian and Mouritzen, Hans (eds) Danish Foreign policy review 2019, Copenhagen: DIIS, Danish institute for international studies. 48-85.
  • Mouritsen ,P. & Olsen,T. V. (2013). Denmark between liberalism and nationalism. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(4), 691-710. DOI: 10. 1080/01419870. 2011. 598233.
  • Mouritzen, H. & Runge Olesen, M. (2010). The interplay of geopolitics and historical lessons in foreign policy: Denmark facing German post-war rearmament. Cooperation and Conflict, 45(4), 406–427. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0010836710387028
  • Mouritzen, H. (2007). Denmark's super Atlanticism. Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 5(2). 155-167.
  • Mouritzen, H. (2006). Choosing Sides in the European Iraq Conflict: A Test of New Geopolitical Theory. Journal European Security. Vol. 15(2). 137-163
  • Olsen, G. R. (2011). How Strong Is Europeanisation, Really? The Danish Defence Administration and the Opt-Out from the European Security and Defence Policy. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 12(1), 13-28, DOI: 10. 1080/15705854. 2011. 546141.
  • Pedersen, R. B. (2018). Was something rotten in the state of Denmark? Three narratives of the active internationalism in Danish foreign policy. Cooperation and Conflict, 53(4), 449–466.
  • Pedersen, R. B. (2016). Past, present, and future: the role of the Cold War in legitimising Danish foreign policy activism. Cold War History, 16(1), 101-120. DOI: 10. 1080/14682745. 2015. 1078791.
  • Pedersen, R. B. (2013). Footnote Policy’ and the Social Democratic Party’s Role in Shaping Danish EEC Positions, 1982–1986. Scandinavian Journal of History. Vol. 38(5) 636-657.
  • Pedersen, R.B. (2012). Danish foreign policy activism: Differences in kind or degree?. Cooperation and Conflict, 47(3), pp: 331-349.
  • Petersen,N. (2000). National strategies in the integration dilemma: The promises of adaptation theory. In: Branner H and Kelstrup M (eds) Denmark’s Policy towards Europe after 1945: History. Theory and Options. Odense: Odense Universitetsforlag, 72–99.
  • Rasmussen, M. V. (2017). Nationalists, national liberals and cosmopolitans: Danish foreign policy debates after Brexit and Trump. In: Fischer K and Mouritzen H (eds) Foreign Policy Yearbook 2017. Copenhagen: DIIS, 51–74
  • Rasmussen, M. V. (2005). What’s the Use of It?’Danish Strategic Culture and the Utility of Armed Force. Cooperation and Conflict, 40(1), 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836705049735
  • Wivel, A. (2018) Forerunner, follower, exceptionalist or bridge builder? Mapping Nordicness in Danish foreign policy. Global Affairs, 4(4-5), 419-434, DOI: 10. 1080/23340460. 2018. 1557016.
  • Wivel, A. (2013) From Peacemaker to Warmonger? Explaining Denmark's Great Power Politics. Swiss political science review. Vol. 19(3) 298-321. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12043
  • Wivel, A. (2005). Between Paradise and Power: Denmark’s Transatlantic Dilemma. Security Dialogue, 36(3), 417–421. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0967010605057974