Militära samarbeten är stora säkerhetspolitiska frågor som kräver väl avvägda beslut.Uttrycket tillsammans med andra har genomsyrat svensk säkerhetspolitik de senaste tio åren. Säkerhetspolitiken är komplex och valet av partner inom försvarssamarbeten behöver studeras, förstås och förklaras. I denna uppsats studeras militära samarbeten genom hur uttrycket tillsammans med andra används politiskt och militärt. Syftet med studien är att söka förklaringar på de militära samarbeten som Sverige genomför. Detta görs genom en kvalitativ jämförande fallstudie av två utvalda fall. Studien visar att integrationsteoretiska förklaringsmodeller kan användas för att förklaramilitära samarbeten. I analysen har ett fall av militärt samarbete med Finland studerats jämte ett fall av militärt samarbete med Nederländerna. Samarbetet med Finland kan till huvuddel förklaras med mellanstatlig integrationsteori och samarbetet med Nederländerna förklaras till huvuddel med neofunktionalism. Slutsatserna kopplas också samman med de säkerhetsstrategiska begreppen vilket skapar djupare förståelse för den komplexa och dynamiska process som leder fram till ett militärt samarbete. Svenska säkerhetsstrategiska mål påverkade av vår omgivande strategiska miljö styr metod och medel på ett sätt som tillsammans med integrationsteorier förklarar valet av samarbetspartner inom säkerhetspolitiken. / Military collaborations with other countries are considerable security policy matters which require well balanced decisions. The expression in collaboration with others has permeated Swedish security policy through the last decade. Security policy are complex and the choice of a partner in military collaborations needs to be studied, understood and explained.  In this composition military collaborations are studied through how the expression in collaboration with others is used both in a military and in a political context. The purpose is to explain the military collaborations that Sweden carries out. This is done with a qualitative comparing case study with two selected cases.  The study shows that theories of integration can be used to explain military collaborations. In the analysis one case of collaboration with Finland has been studied beside one case of collaboration with the Netherlands. The collaboration with Finland is mainly explained with intergovernmentalism and the collaboration with the Netherlands is mainly explained with neofunctionalism.  The conclusions are also connected to strategic terms which creates a profound understanding for the complex and dynamic process that leads into a military collaboration. Sweden's strategic objectives influenced by our surrounding strategic context directs the methods and means in a way that together with theories of integration explains the chosen partner in security policy.

In recent years, the EU has been facing more crises than ever before, a trend that most likely will not be broken. Over the last few years, we have seen an economic crisis, migration crisis and a pandemic to name a few. With every new crisis where there is no set agenda on how to act member states are presented with a choice of either take the matter in their own hand and go-it-alone or pursue integration and cooperation. With each member state being able to chose there is potential for the cooperation to become strained. Thus, the purpose of this thesis is to understand the choice of go-it-alone or integration in a context of the nexus of state sovereignty/integration. The nexus will be used to understand the choices of Estonia and Hungary during the Migration crisis and Covid-19 pandemic.  The study was conducted by making use of a qualitative comparative approach of Estonia and Hungary. To engage with the concept of sovereignty four criteria were established from previous theory, Intergovernmentalism and Neofunctionalism. Each perspective was constructed into a pole structured ideal type to allow for analysis based on official governmental material, such as press releases.  The results show that the nexus ’state sovereignty/integration’ can explain the choices made of Estonia and Hungary to either go-it-alone or cooperate. The results show that Estonia was more likely to, in times of crisis, approach integration, but only slightly. Hungary on the other hand was more likely to go-it-alone.

Thesis Theoretical reflection Iceland integration into the European Union: neofunctionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism discusses integration of Iceland into the European Union, and tryi to analyze this case in the context of two theoretical approaches, neofunctionalism and liberal intergovernmentalism. Since the creation of an independent state in 1944, Iceland held traditionally isolationist and Euro-skeptic stance. In 1970 he became member of the European Free Trade Association. Gradually relationships has intensifyied and deepend with participation in the European Economic Area and the Schengen Convention. After the economic crisis in 2008, which hit in Iceland with unusual power because of risky actions of local banks, the newly elected government decided to make a historic step and apply for membership in the European Union. The first part of the thesis is an analysis of foreign policy and the position of Iceland in international relations. Subsequently thesis explores the integration of Iceland from the perspective of three different actors, Iceland, European Union member States and the European Union, first from a theoretical point of view following with empirical level. Based on the findings should be made to confirm the theoretical starting points of one of the two selected directions.

The thesis analyses the 2013 Cohesion Policy reform as a case of European integration. By revisiting neofunctionalism and combining it with the Multiple Streams approach, it is possible to provide a new angle to the phenomenon of the Cohesion Policy’s integration into the European economic governance framework. The thesis utilises qualitative content analysis to systematically analyse the dynamics that influenced the reform process and eventually lead to the establishment of new integrative linkages. It is revealed how the integration dynamics originated in the economic policy arena and spilled over into the Cohesion Policy reform. Consequently, the thesis concludes that the neofunctionalist concept of functional spillover remains a powerful analytical tool and it is shown in what way neofunctional mechanisms continue to materialise in the European polity.

Cybersecurity is an increasingly important topic to all actors from the private individuals to international institutions. The borderless nature of the internet has however made it more difficult for nation states to take care of their own security and institutions like the EU are also coping with the difficulties of defending themselves from attacks that can affect practically any part of the system and cause wide-spread damage. The EU has tried to address these issues by publishing strategies to improve the cybersecurity of the Union and its Member States. This thesis studies the discourse that is used by the Union in its strategies from 2013 and 2020. This is done to determine how the EU portrays each level, the national, institutional, or private and how responsible they are for the cybersecurity in the Union and to see how this discourse has changed in the previous few years. The theoretical framework of the thesis consists of neofunctionalism and historical institutionalism which are used to explain the direction of the development of the EU’s discourse. The study is conducted using critical discourse analysis and qualitative content analysis. The findings of the analysis suggest that there is noticeable shift to the EU taking more responsibility and actions to ensure its cybersecurity. Similarly it seems remarkable how the importance of the private sector seems to have diminished in the newer discourse.

<p>This dissertation examines efforts to integrate a “new” policy sector – forest and forestry – into the European Union (EU). There is currently no legal foundation for a common forest policy and some member states (not least Sweden), as well as parts of the forestry sector, have been strongly opposed to one. At the same time, administrative units and structures within the EU have been created and they and some member states have promoted a common policy. This raises the question how can we understand and explain this?</p><p>The purpose of this dissertation is to problematise, map and analyse mainly Swedish actors’ attitudes to efforts to create a common forest policy within the EU. The study is based on neofunctionalism, which is a classic theory of integration, but it uses newer theorising (from intergovernmentalism and modern versions of neofunctionalism) to address some of the weaknesses of the approach.</p><p>I investigate the role, preferences and strategies of the main actors. This includes EU institutions and member states. I also map European industry interests and other associations, interest groups and active networks and study their role in the process. In these multi-national settings, I pay particular (although not exclusive) attention to their Swedish members. Within Sweden, I examine how governmental and non-governmental forest actors behave vis-à-vis the EU.</p><p>The empirical investigation shows that some of Swedish actors, for example the private forest owners’ organisation and forest industries associations, have change their preferences and strate gies over time. They have come to believe that whether they like it or not, other policy areas affect forest and forestry both directly and indirectly. Because of this, they now take the position that it is better to promote a limited European forest policy rather than remaining aloof and risk the creation of a much more comprehensive and centralised policy. At the same time (and for now at least), the Swedish government and most party politicians remain opposed to any attempt to formalise a forest policy within the EU.</p><p>This study contributes new knowledge about how new policy areas become integrated within EU, including knowledge about the roles that different actors can have in such processes. The results are of interest to researchers, decision makers and the interested public. They can also influence thinking about Sweden’s influence in, and relation to, EU forest policy.</p><p>Based on the empirical results, my theoretical conclusion is that organised interests have an important role in the integration process. The integration process of forest and forestry is not driven by one actor, but by many different actors, who operate on different levels and who have different interests.</p><p>This study shows that forest and forestry-related questions have come to the EU, and they will remain there. The important question for the future is not if there will be some kind of European level policy on forest and forestry, but rather what form European policy will take.</p>

This dissertation examines efforts to integrate a “new” policy sector – forest and forestry – into the European Union (EU). There is currently no legal foundation for a common forest policy and some member states (not least Sweden), as well as parts of the forestry sector, have been strongly opposed to one. At the same time, administrative units and structures within the EU have been created and they and some member states have promoted a common policy. This raises the question how can we understand and explain this? The purpose of this dissertation is to problematise, map and analyse mainly Swedish actors’ attitudes to efforts to create a common forest policy within the EU. The study is based on neofunctionalism, which is a classic theory of integration, but it uses newer theorising (from intergovernmentalism and modern versions of neofunctionalism) to address some of the weaknesses of the approach. I investigate the role, preferences and strategies of the main actors. This includes EU institutions and member states. I also map European industry interests and other associations, interest groups and active networks and study their role in the process. In these multi-national settings, I pay particular (although not exclusive) attention to their Swedish members. Within Sweden, I examine how governmental and non-governmental forest actors behave vis-à-vis the EU. The empirical investigation shows that some of Swedish actors, for example the private forest owners’ organisation and forest industries associations, have change their preferences and strate gies over time. They have come to believe that whether they like it or not, other policy areas affect forest and forestry both directly and indirectly. Because of this, they now take the position that it is better to promote a limited European forest policy rather than remaining aloof and risk the creation of a much more comprehensive and centralised policy. At the same time (and for now at least), the Swedish government and most party politicians remain opposed to any attempt to formalise a forest policy within the EU. This study contributes new knowledge about how new policy areas become integrated within EU, including knowledge about the roles that different actors can have in such processes. The results are of interest to researchers, decision makers and the interested public. They can also influence thinking about Sweden’s influence in, and relation to, EU forest policy. Based on the empirical results, my theoretical conclusion is that organised interests have an important role in the integration process. The integration process of forest and forestry is not driven by one actor, but by many different actors, who operate on different levels and who have different interests. This study shows that forest and forestry-related questions have come to the EU, and they will remain there. The important question for the future is not if there will be some kind of European level policy on forest and forestry, but rather what form European policy will take.

Member States' observations in proceedings before the Court of Justice compared with the

This study is an attempt to understand strategy-making in the European Union (EU). By targeting the strategy-making process of the European Union Global Strategy (EUGS), the stydy aims to reveal the legal provisions and the in-practice procedures of strategy-making in the area of EU foreign policy. The thesis presents two theories, liberal intergovernmentalism and neofunctionalism, from which it constructs two contrasting ideal types of policy-making. By applying the theoretical ideal types on the targeted case, that is the strategy-making process of the EUGS, the study reflects on the relationships between Member states and the EU, as well as on the inter-institutional dynamics that would come to characterize the progress and development of the EUGS.  Despite difficulties in rejecting any of the theoretical ideal types, the study finds the policy-formulation of the EUGS to be more coherent with the neofunctional ideal type than that of liberal intergovernmentalism. This is due to the central role of the European External Action Service (EEAS) which would come to conduct an innovative policy-formulation phase of the strategy and to the lack of bargaining between the Member States on the textual provisions of the strategy. The neofunctional ideal type does yet fall short in explaining for the EUGS as an initial concept and partly for the implementation of the strategy, favoring a liberal intergovernmental interpretation of how the instruments of the EUGS would come to be initiated. The study also reflects on if the experience of making the EUGS may provide for an argument to review the presumed centrality of Member States being the ultimate drivers of EU foreign policy.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has long been recognized as a major engine behind the European integration project for its role in passing judgments expanding the powers and scope of the European Community, while member states have consistently reacted negatively to judgments limiting their sovereignty or granting the Community new powers. It is this interplay between the Court and member state interests that cause the ECJ to pose a threat to the future of integration. Using a combined framework of neofunctionalism and rational choice new institutionalism, six landmark cases and the events surrounding them are studied, revealing the motivations behind the Court’s and member states’ actions. From the analysis of these cases is created a set of criteria which can be used to predict when the ECJ will make an activist decision broadening the powers of the Community at the expense of the member states as well as when, and how, member states will respond negatively.