”How is defence cooperation effected due to a perceived imbalance of threat?” When faced with a threat, the balance of threat theory implies that states ally in order to aggregate capabilities to deter the threat. However, states have multiple options to increase security by adding military power, with internal balancing on the one side and external balancing on the other. In order to better explain actions taken by states to balance a threat, a new shade that does not include defence obligations is needed for the balance of threat theory. In this paper, changes in defence cooperation is that shade. By including changes in defence cooperation as a response to increased threat, for example the purchase of defence materials, joint training and defence planning, the balance of threat theory can expand its current explanatory power. Also, by understanding these changes states can prepare for it in advance and react on short notice, since today’s security environment changes rapidly. To study if changes in defence cooperation can be included into the balance of threat theory, Swedish defence cooperation with three partners (NATO, Finland and within NORDEFCO) are examined before and after the aggressive behaviour by Russia in 2014. The results are distinct and unitary, all cooperation changed to a more alliance-like purpose, to counter threats by presenting combined strength, but without formal or informal defence obligations. These actions strengthened the capability to function together by enhancing interoperability and preparing for common action in peace, crisis and conflict.

We have in our thesis focused on the bilateral defence and security cooperation between Sweden and Great Britain and investigated if Brexit have led to any consequenses on the cooperation between the two countries. We have also investigated possible consequenses on the bilateral cooperation in regards to Great Britain’s global ambitions. The defence cooperation is viewed from a Swedish perspective. Great Britain is a major security actor with global ambitions. Although, the EU has been a platform for cooperation in different political fields, including defence and security. With Great Britain leaving the EU, Sweden and Great Britain will lose this common platform. This change needs to be considered, especially due to the fact that Sweden has declared the ambition to deepen the defence and security cooperation with Great Britain. In this qualitative study we have turned to experts within the defence and security field with knowledge on the bilateral cooperation between Sweden and Great Britain. We have concluded that the bilateral defence and security cooperation have not been negatively influenced due to the British decision to leave the EU, nor it’s global ambition Global Britain. Although, Great Britain have announced it’s global ambitions after Brexit, we have concluded both that they have an interest in Sweden's vicinity and also that the cooperation have instead deepened during the last couple of years. We can also conclude that there are conditions in favour of a continued and deepened defence cooperation between Sweden and Great Britain. This thesis is written from a Swedish perspective. One of our recommendations for future research is recommending to explore the bilateral Swedish British defence cooperation from a British perspective. Finally, we have concluded that Brexit and Global Britain are not the ”Game Changer” as the title of the thesis imply. This was an assumption we made in the beginning of the work. But as the empirical studies have shown, this is not the case. / Vi har i denna uppsats fokuserat på det bilaterala försvarssamarbetet mellan Sverige och Storbritannien och hur Brexit eventuellt påverkar samarbetet. Vidare har vi undersökt om Storbritanniens globala ambitioner påverkar det bilaterala försvarssamarbetet. Vi har belyst försvarssamarbetet ur ett svenskt perspektiv. Storbritannien är en stor säkerhetspolitisk aktör med globala ambitioner och där EU har varit en naturlig plattform för samarbete inom flertalet olika politiska områden inklusive försvars- och säkerhetspolitik. Med Storbritanniens utträde ur EU så mister Sverige och Storbritannien denna gemensamma plattform för samarbete och denna förändring måste hanteras, speciellt då Sverige deklarerar att man vill fördjupa samarbetet med Storbritannien inom försvars-området. I denna kvalitativa intervjustudie har vi vänt oss till sakkunniga inom det försvars- och säkerhetspolitiska området vilka har god kunskap om det bilaterala samarbetet mellan Sverige och Storbritannien. Vi kan konstatera att det bilaterala försvars- och säkerhetssamarbetet inte har fått några negativa konsekvenser kopplat till Storbritanniens utträde ur EU eller dess globala ambition Global Britain. Trots att Storbritannien har aviserat globala ambitioner efter Brexit kan vi dels konstatera dess intresse att verka i Sveriges närområde samt också att vårt bilaterala samarbete snarare har fördjupats de senaste åren. Vi har även kunnat konstatera att det finns goda förutsättningar för ett fortsatt och fördjupat försvarssamarbete mellan Sverige och Storbritannien. Denna uppsats är skriven ur ett svenskt perspektiv. En av våra rekommendationer för framtida forskning föreslår att även utreda försvarssamarbetet ur ett brittiskt perspektiv. Avslutningsvis har vi konstaterat att Brexit och Global Britain inte är någon större ”Game changer” för det bilaterala försvarssamarbetet mellan Sverige och Storbritannien som uppsatsens titel implicerar. Detta var ett antagande vi gjorde när arbetet inleddes, men som utifrån vår empiri inte visat sig stämma.

Den 31 augusti 2007 lämnade det norska och svenska högkvarteren in ett förslag på fördjupatförsvarssamarbete mellan länderna. Det råder det inga som helst tvivel om att den mest väsentligadrivkraften för detta samarbete är ekonomi. Bägge länderna riskerar att förlora väsentliga delar avsina förmågor p.g.a. nedskurna budgetar. Man vill därför åstadkomma ett ”ömsesidigtförstärkande” av de bägge ländernas produktionsförutsättningar. Förslaget innebär ett nytt synsättpå försvarssamarbeten. Frågan blir då hur man kan karaktärisera detta nya samarbete och vargränsen går mellan allians och försvarssamarbete? Denna uppsats utreder graden av integrationoch beroende i föreslaget samarbete, samt vilka konsekvenser detta kan få. Jämförelsen görs motrådande och tidigare samarbeten. Resultatet indikerar att samarbetet går mot en hög grad avintegration mellan ländernas försvarsmakter. Graden av beroende är svårare att avgöra då denpolitiska avtalsbildningen inte är klarlagd. Konsekvenserna av samarbetet bedöms påverka svensktrovärdighet avseende alliansfriheten samt utmaningen hur personalfrågorna inom respektiveförsvarsmakterna skall hanteras. Svårigheten ligger dessutom i att klarlägga konsekvenserna avindirekta beroenden som skapas genom djup integration och politiska lojalitetsdeklarationer. / On the 31 of august 2007, both Swedish and Norwegian supreme headquarters presented aproposal of a new military cooperation between the countries. The main motive is the economicsituation. The military forces in both countries are in a risk of losing vital areas of therecapabilities because of downsizing in budgets. To avoid that situation, both headquarters wants toachieve a “mutual reinforcement” to support the force generation process. This essay attempts toclarify the degree of integration and dependence, including possible consequences. Existing andhistorical cooperation are used as a comparison. The result indicates that this cooperation willlead to high degree of military integration. The degree of dependence is more difficult to conclude,because the lack of decided political agreements. The consequences will affect the Swedishdeclaration of non-alignment and challenges in staffing policy issues. Another problem iselucidating possible consequences of indirect dependences, which are influenced by deepintegration and political declarations of loyalty. / Avdelning: ALB - Slutet Mag 3 C-upps. Hylla: Upps. ChP 06-08

The concept of strategy has been the subject of much theorising and much has been written about what strategy is and what reasons might underlie the choice of different strategies. Considerably less has been written, however, about how strategy is actually done - what actions follow from the choice of strategy - and about those who actually do the action - the practitioners of strategy. In this paper, cooperation between France and Sweden is studied through the eyes of these practitioners with the ambition of increasing our understanding of defence strategic cooperation. The results of the study are threefold. Initially, French and Swedish strategy and the cooperation that takes place between the countries within the framework of their respective military cooperation strategies are described. Next, the practice of cooperation is described based on the activities described by the informants during the interviews. Finally, the practitioners' actions and the skills needed to operate in a political-diplomatic environment are described. Finally, a summary model of defence strategy cooperation from a practitioner's perspective is presented. The paper contributes both to the understanding of what cooperation actually consists of and to the understanding of how strategy becomes practical action. The inductive study is conducted as a qualitative interview study and does not claim to provide causal facts - the main contribution is about empirically grounded knowledge. / Strategibegreppet har varit föremål för omfattande teoretiserande och mycket har skrivits om vad strategi är och vilka skäl som eventuellt ligger bakom val av olika strategier. Betydligt mindre är dock skrivet om hur man egentligen gör strategi – vilket handlande som följer av valet av strategi – och om de som faktiskt utför handlandet – strategins praktiker. I denna uppsats studeras samarbetet mellan Frankrike och Sverige genom dessa praktikers ögon med ambitionen att öka vår förståelse för försvarsvarsstrategiskt samarbete. Resultatet av undersökningen är tredelat. Inledningsvis beskrivs fransk och svensk strategi och det samarbete som sker mellan länderna inom ramen för respektive militära samverkansstrategi. Därefter redogörs för samarbetes praktik utifrån de aktiviteter som informanterna beskrivit under intervjuerna. Slutligen beskrivs praktikernas handlande och de färdigheter som behövs för att kunna verka i en politisk-diplomatisk miljö. Avslutningsvis presenteras en sammanfattande modell för försvarsstrategiskt samarbete ur ett praktikerperspektiv. Uppsatsen bidrar dels till förståelsen av vad samarbete egentligen består av, dels till förståelsen av hur strategi blir praktisk handlande. Den induktiva undersökningen genomförs som en kvalitativ intervjuundersökningen och gör inte anspråk på att ge kausala fakta - det främsta bidraget handlar om empiriskt välgrundad kunskap. / Le concept de stratégie a fait l'objet de nombreuses théories et on a beaucoup écrit sur ce qu'est la stratégie et sur les raisons possibles du choix de différentes stratégies. Cependant, on a beaucoup moins écrit sur la manière dont la stratégie est réellement mise en œuvre - les actions qui découlent du choix de la stratégie - et sur ceux qui agissent réellement - les praticiens de la stratégie. Dans cet memoir, les résultats de l'étude sont triples. Dans un premier temps, il décrit la stratégie française et suédoise et la coopération qui a lieu entre les pays dans le cadre de leurs stratégies respectives de coopération militaire. Ensuite, la pratique de la coopération est décrite sur la base des activités décrites par les informateurs au cours des entretiens. Enfin, les actions des praticiens et les compétences nécessaires pour opérer dans un environnement politico-diplomatique sont décrites. Enfin, un modèle sommaire de coopération en matière de stratégie de défense du point de vue d'un praticien est présenté. Ce document contribue à la compréhension de ce qu'est réellement la coopération, et à la compréhension de la manière dont la stratégie devient une action pratique. L'étude inductive est menée sous la forme d'une étude qualitative par entretiens et ne prétend pas fournir des faits causaux - la principale contribution concerne les connaissances empiriques fondées.

This thesis asks why the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) continues to exist and remain relevant in the defence of North America following the disappearance of the threat of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. This thesis argues that NORAD’s binational nature is key to understanding the command’s continued role in continental defence. By employing the international relation theories of functionalism and neoliberal institutionalism as a lens of analysis to understand binational defence cooperation, NORAD’s origins as a binational defence command tasked with the air defence of North America, and its acquisition of its responsibilities for drug interdiction, the continental interior, and for maritime warning are analyzed. NORAD’s longevity and continued relevance can be attributed to the command’s binational nature, which has allowed the command to focus on and institutionalize specific functional-technical solutions to select issues of mutual concern in continental defence and security for Canada and the U.S. / May 2016

A cooperação em defesa na América do Sul é explicada pela Teoria Realista Ofensiva de Cooperação em Defesa sob a Unipolaridade - aqui introduzida. Identificada uma lacuna significativa nas teorias de Relações Internacionais e nos trabalhos que buscam explicar, de forma ad hoc, a cooperação em defesa em outras regiões do mundo, nossa teoria traz explicações para (1) a motivação dos Estados para cooperar em defesa; (2) as variáveis independentes que afetam a cooperação em defesa; (3) um modelo amplo de cooperação em defesa que possa ser replicado em diferentes regiões do mundo. Demonstramos que cooperar em defesa serve para aumentar a posição relativa dos Estados participantes tanto frente aos demais Estados quanto frente à potência unipolar, sem, contudo, aumentar as pressões do dilema da segurança. Esse suposto reafirma o princípio egoísta dos Estados, de buscarem maximizar o seu poder para melhor garantir a sua sobrevivência, mas mostrando que novos tempos exigem novas formas de maximização de poder. Para tanto, demonstramos a continuidade da unipolaridade dos Estados Unidos na balança de poder global e apontamos, via 15 indicadores diferentes, que a polaridade sul-americana encontra-se em um momento de transição entre uma multipolaridade desequilibrada e uma unipolaridade brasileira, sofrendo pressões sistêmicas de ambas as configurações e corroborando as expectativas de nossa teoria. Conclui-se que o reaparelhamento ou não das Forças Armadas brasileiras levará à definição do sobe e desce das pressões sistêmicas regionais para a cooperação em defesa: se confirmada a unipolaridade, haverá maiores incentivos para as iniciativas em andamento criadas e mantidas pelo protagonismo brasileiro, como a UNASUL e o CDS. Contudo, se configurada a multipolaridade desequilibrada, os incentivos sistêmicos serão para a manutenção de uma integração baixa e instituições fracas na área de cooperação em defesa na América do Sul. / The defence cooperation in South America is explained by the Offensive Realist Theory of Cooperation in Defence under Unipolarity - hereby introduced. After identifying a meaningful gap in international relations theories and in ad hoc works which tryed to explain defence cooperation in other parts of the world, our theory brings explanations for (1) states' motivations to cooperate in defence; (2) the independent variables that affect defense cooperation; (3) a comprehensive model of defense cooperation that can be applied to different regions of the world. We have shown that cooperating in defence works for improving the relative position of the participating states vis-a-vis either the other states or the unipole without increasing the pressures of the security dilemma. This requisite reaffirms the selfish principle of states of maximising their power to better ensure their survival, but showing that new times demand new ways of power maximisation. To do so, we have demonstrated the maintenance of the United States' unipolarity at the global balance of power and shown, through 15 different indexes, that the South-American polarity finds itself in a transitory moment between an unbalanced multipolarity and a Brazilian unipolarity, suffering then pressures from both configurations and thus corroborating our theory's expectations. Our conclusion is that the refitting or not of the Brazilian Armed Forces will lead to the definition of the ups and downs of the sistemic regional pressures on defence cooperation: if it is confirmed the Brazilian unipolarity, there will be greater incentives for the ongoing initiatives created and maintened by Brazil, such as UNASUR and SDC. Nevertheless, if the unbalanced multipolarity is confirmed, the sistemic incentives will be for the maintenance of a low regional integration and weak institutions on the South American defence cooperation field.

A cooperação em defesa na América do Sul é explicada pela Teoria Realista Ofensiva de Cooperação em Defesa sob a Unipolaridade - aqui introduzida. Identificada uma lacuna significativa nas teorias de Relações Internacionais e nos trabalhos que buscam explicar, de forma ad hoc, a cooperação em defesa em outras regiões do mundo, nossa teoria traz explicações para (1) a motivação dos Estados para cooperar em defesa; (2) as variáveis independentes que afetam a cooperação em defesa; (3) um modelo amplo de cooperação em defesa que possa ser replicado em diferentes regiões do mundo. Demonstramos que cooperar em defesa serve para aumentar a posição relativa dos Estados participantes tanto frente aos demais Estados quanto frente à potência unipolar, sem, contudo, aumentar as pressões do dilema da segurança. Esse suposto reafirma o princípio egoísta dos Estados, de buscarem maximizar o seu poder para melhor garantir a sua sobrevivência, mas mostrando que novos tempos exigem novas formas de maximização de poder. Para tanto, demonstramos a continuidade da unipolaridade dos Estados Unidos na balança de poder global e apontamos, via 15 indicadores diferentes, que a polaridade sul-americana encontra-se em um momento de transição entre uma multipolaridade desequilibrada e uma unipolaridade brasileira, sofrendo pressões sistêmicas de ambas as configurações e corroborando as expectativas de nossa teoria. Conclui-se que o reaparelhamento ou não das Forças Armadas brasileiras levará à definição do sobe e desce das pressões sistêmicas regionais para a cooperação em defesa: se confirmada a unipolaridade, haverá maiores incentivos para as iniciativas em andamento criadas e mantidas pelo protagonismo brasileiro, como a UNASUL e o CDS. Contudo, se configurada a multipolaridade desequilibrada, os incentivos sistêmicos serão para a manutenção de uma integração baixa e instituições fracas na área de cooperação em defesa na América do Sul. / The defence cooperation in South America is explained by the Offensive Realist Theory of Cooperation in Defence under Unipolarity - hereby introduced. After identifying a meaningful gap in international relations theories and in ad hoc works which tryed to explain defence cooperation in other parts of the world, our theory brings explanations for (1) states' motivations to cooperate in defence; (2) the independent variables that affect defense cooperation; (3) a comprehensive model of defense cooperation that can be applied to different regions of the world. We have shown that cooperating in defence works for improving the relative position of the participating states vis-a-vis either the other states or the unipole without increasing the pressures of the security dilemma. This requisite reaffirms the selfish principle of states of maximising their power to better ensure their survival, but showing that new times demand new ways of power maximisation. To do so, we have demonstrated the maintenance of the United States' unipolarity at the global balance of power and shown, through 15 different indexes, that the South-American polarity finds itself in a transitory moment between an unbalanced multipolarity and a Brazilian unipolarity, suffering then pressures from both configurations and thus corroborating our theory's expectations. Our conclusion is that the refitting or not of the Brazilian Armed Forces will lead to the definition of the ups and downs of the sistemic regional pressures on defence cooperation: if it is confirmed the Brazilian unipolarity, there will be greater incentives for the ongoing initiatives created and maintened by Brazil, such as UNASUR and SDC. Nevertheless, if the unbalanced multipolarity is confirmed, the sistemic incentives will be for the maintenance of a low regional integration and weak institutions on the South American defence cooperation field.

A cooperação em defesa na América do Sul é explicada pela Teoria Realista Ofensiva de Cooperação em Defesa sob a Unipolaridade - aqui introduzida. Identificada uma lacuna significativa nas teorias de Relações Internacionais e nos trabalhos que buscam explicar, de forma ad hoc, a cooperação em defesa em outras regiões do mundo, nossa teoria traz explicações para (1) a motivação dos Estados para cooperar em defesa; (2) as variáveis independentes que afetam a cooperação em defesa; (3) um modelo amplo de cooperação em defesa que possa ser replicado em diferentes regiões do mundo. Demonstramos que cooperar em defesa serve para aumentar a posição relativa dos Estados participantes tanto frente aos demais Estados quanto frente à potência unipolar, sem, contudo, aumentar as pressões do dilema da segurança. Esse suposto reafirma o princípio egoísta dos Estados, de buscarem maximizar o seu poder para melhor garantir a sua sobrevivência, mas mostrando que novos tempos exigem novas formas de maximização de poder. Para tanto, demonstramos a continuidade da unipolaridade dos Estados Unidos na balança de poder global e apontamos, via 15 indicadores diferentes, que a polaridade sul-americana encontra-se em um momento de transição entre uma multipolaridade desequilibrada e uma unipolaridade brasileira, sofrendo pressões sistêmicas de ambas as configurações e corroborando as expectativas de nossa teoria. Conclui-se que o reaparelhamento ou não das Forças Armadas brasileiras levará à definição do sobe e desce das pressões sistêmicas regionais para a cooperação em defesa: se confirmada a unipolaridade, haverá maiores incentivos para as iniciativas em andamento criadas e mantidas pelo protagonismo brasileiro, como a UNASUL e o CDS. Contudo, se configurada a multipolaridade desequilibrada, os incentivos sistêmicos serão para a manutenção de uma integração baixa e instituições fracas na área de cooperação em defesa na América do Sul. / The defence cooperation in South America is explained by the Offensive Realist Theory of Cooperation in Defence under Unipolarity - hereby introduced. After identifying a meaningful gap in international relations theories and in ad hoc works which tryed to explain defence cooperation in other parts of the world, our theory brings explanations for (1) states' motivations to cooperate in defence; (2) the independent variables that affect defense cooperation; (3) a comprehensive model of defense cooperation that can be applied to different regions of the world. We have shown that cooperating in defence works for improving the relative position of the participating states vis-a-vis either the other states or the unipole without increasing the pressures of the security dilemma. This requisite reaffirms the selfish principle of states of maximising their power to better ensure their survival, but showing that new times demand new ways of power maximisation. To do so, we have demonstrated the maintenance of the United States' unipolarity at the global balance of power and shown, through 15 different indexes, that the South-American polarity finds itself in a transitory moment between an unbalanced multipolarity and a Brazilian unipolarity, suffering then pressures from both configurations and thus corroborating our theory's expectations. Our conclusion is that the refitting or not of the Brazilian Armed Forces will lead to the definition of the ups and downs of the sistemic regional pressures on defence cooperation: if it is confirmed the Brazilian unipolarity, there will be greater incentives for the ongoing initiatives created and maintened by Brazil, such as UNASUR and SDC. Nevertheless, if the unbalanced multipolarity is confirmed, the sistemic incentives will be for the maintenance of a low regional integration and weak institutions on the South American defence cooperation field.

Försvarssamarbetet mellan Sverige och Finland har accelererat under de senaste åren. Sist ut och kanske även den mest komplicerade delen i detta samarbete är samarbetet mellan de båda ländernas arméer. Markförbandens unika kontext sätter den mänskliga interaktionen i centrum då stora mängder människor, fordon och system skall ledas och samordnas i tid och rum på en begränsad geografisk yta. När denna verksamhet involverar två försvarsmakter uppstår en interaktion som är intressant att studera. Ur ett arméperspektiv belyser studien de förutsättningarna och de faktorer som påverkar det svensk-finska militära samarbetet, med den taktiska nivån som utgångspunkt. Studien baseras på intervjuer med officerare från både svenska och finska försvarsmakten, och tar upp och förklarar både faktorer som förenar och driver samarbetet framåt respektive faktorer som försvårar samarbetet. Slutsatserna i studien förklaras kring en modell som beskriver de faktorer som i störst utsträckning påverkar samarbetet samt hur dessa förhåller sig till sin kontext. Studien visar att det finns olikheter mellan försvarsmakterna som påverkar samarbetet, men också aspekter som stärker det gemensamma arbetet. Sammantaget pekar studien på fem faktorer inom olika områden som har tydlig påverkan på samarbetet. Faktorerna påverkar samarbetet på olika sätt med olika påverkansgrad på olika nivåer i organisationen. Samarbetets drivkraft är starkt knutet till den tydliga politiska viljan. Den svenska och finska ledningskulturen skiljer sig år vilket återspeglas på alla nivåer men är tydligast och får störst påverkan på den lägre nivån. Språket är en skiljande faktor. Lösningen med ett gemensamt arbetsspråk är logisk men studien visar att det innebär utmaningar av större dimension än vid första anblick. Att bygga ett samarbete utan avtalade förpliktelser gör att tillit och förtroende får en betydande roll. För ett samarbete mellan arméstridskrafter är vikten av ett ledningsstödsystem central. Det gemensamma arbetet inom ledningssystemområdet kan skapa dessa förutsättningar. Olikheterna till trots så har Sverige och Finland redan ett väl fungerande samarbete, vilket nutida erfarenheter visar bland annat från våra gemensamma beredskapsförband och internationella insatser. Man har också genom tydlig målsättning och ambition mycket goda förutsättningar att fördjupa samarbetet ytterligare. / The defence cooperation between Sweden and Finland has accelerated during the last couple of years. Last into the cooperation, and maybe the most complex part is the cooperation between the two armies. The unique context of land forces puts human interaction in focus when large amounts of people, vehicles and technical systems are to be commanded and coordinated in time and in a limited geographical space. When this type of action involves two defence forces the dynamics that occurs is worth studying. This thesis project studies the conditions and factors that affect the Swedish-Finnish defence cooperation on a tactical level, from an Army perspective. The study explains both the driving and the constricting factors in the cooperation. The research is based on interviews with Swedish and Finnish army officers. Conclusions are drawn supported by a model built on the factors that are most influential on the cooperation and how these factors apply to the context of the cooperation. The thesis shows that there are differences between the two defence forces that affect the cooperation, but it also shows aspects that strengthens the efforts. The factors have different effects and different impact depending on the organisational level in the defence forces. The conclusions points to five strong factors in different areas that influence the cooperation. The main drive has a strong connection to the political will. Swedish and Finnish leadership culture is diversified, this shows and has the greatest impact on lower organisational levels. Language is a dividing factor. It is a logical solution to use a common working language, but this study shows that the common language results in great challenges. Building a cooperation without obligations means that trust and confidence are of substantial importance. In a cooperation between Armies a common command and control system is vital. The collaboration on system development can set the condition for a common command and control system. Even though this study found differences it also found a working cooperation. Proof of this is our bilateral high readiness units and international operations. Through clear and common goals and ambitions there are prerequisites for an even deeper cooperation. / Yhteenveto Ruotsin ja Suomen puolustusyhteistyö on edennyt nopeasti viime vuosina. Viimeinen ja ehkä monimutkaisin osa tätä yhteistyötä on molempien maiden maavoimien välinen yhteistyö. Maavoimien yksikköjen ainutlaatuisuus asettaa keskeiseksi ihmisten vuorovaikutuksen, jossa suuria määriä ihmisiä, ajoneuvoja ja järjestelmiä on johdettava ja koordinoitava aikaan ja paikkaan rajoitetulla maantieteellisellä alueella. Kun tähän toimintaan liittyy kahden maan puolustusvoimaa, muodostuva dynamiikka on pohdinnan arvoinen. Maavoimien näkökulmasta tutkimuksessa tuodaan esiin olosuhteet ja tekijät, jotka vaikuttavat Ruotsin ja Suomen väliseen sotilaalliseen yhteistyöhön, lähtökohtana taktinen taso. Tutkimuksessa tarkastellaan ja selitetään sekä yhteistyötä yhdistäviä ja eteenpäin vieviä tekijöitä että yhteistyön vaikeuttavia tekijöitä. Tutkimus perustuu sekä Ruotsin että Suomen armeijan upseerien haastatteluihin. Tutkimus perustuu johtopäätöksiin mallista joka kuvaa tekijöitä jotka vaikuttavat yhteistyöhön eniten ja miten nämä liittyvät sen kontekstiin. Tutkimus osoittaa, että asevoimien välillä on eroja jotka vaikuttavat yhteistyöhön, mutta myös aspekteja jotka vahvistavat yhteistä työtä. Kaiken kaikkiaan tutkimus osoittaa viisi tekijää eri alueilla, joilla on selvä vaikutus yhteistyöhön. Tekijät vaikuttavat yhteistyöhön eri tavoin ja erilaisilla vaikutustasoilla organisaation eri tasoilla. Yhteistyön liikkeellepaneva voima liittyy kiinteästi selkeään poliittiseen tahtoon. Ruotsin ja Suomen johtamiskulttuuri eroavat, mikä heijastuu kaikilla tasoilla, mutta on selkein ja vaikuttaa enempi alemmalla tasolla. Kieli on erottava tekijä. Yhteinen työkieli on ratkaisuna looginen, mutta tutkimus osoittaa, että se asettaa suurempia haasteita kuin ensi silmäyksellä voisi todeta. Yhteistyön rakentaminen ilman sopimusvelvoitteita tarkoittaa, että luottamuksella on merkittävä rooli. Komentotukijärjestelmän merkitys on keskeinen maavoimien yhteistyölle. Yhteinen työskentely johtamisjärjestelmän alueella voi luoda nämä olosuhteet. Eroista huolimatta Ruotsilla ja Suomella on jo hyvin toimiva yhteistyö, jonka nykypäivän kokemukset osoittavat esimerkiksi yhteisistä valmiusjoukoista ja kansainvälisistä rauhanturvaamis- ja kriisinhallintatehtävistä. Selkeät tavoitteet ja pyrkimykset luovat myös erittäin hyvät edellytykset syventää yhteistyötä entisestään.

The subject of this diploma thesis is the topic of Poland-United States bilateral relations, the form of which results, among other things, from the geographical location and historical experience of Poland. This bilateral cooperation has a major impact on events in the region, making it a very relevant topic to explore in the light of current developments on the international scene. The work is conducted in the form of a case study and its purpose is to analyse the dynamics of Poland-United States cooperation, while the basic premise of the research is the asymmetric form of Polish-U.S. bilateral relations. The aim is to point out that relations between Warsaw and Washington are, by their development and current form, based on consensus rather than coercion from the position of a stronger partner. Glenn H. Snyder's alliance security dilemma is used in this work to analyse the dynamics, too. Due to the conceptualization of strategic culture as a context of strategic behaviour, the work also provides a relatively detailed insight into Polish strategic culture, which serves as a tool for better understanding of Polish foreign policy, security priorities and thus motivation to maintain significant relations with the United States. It is precisely the form of these relations that opens the opportunity...