The purpose of this study is to examine how the European Union's foreign policy demonstrates the theories human rights, feminism and globalization. This will be examined in how the theories are demonstrated in the foreign policy and also how there is a difference between how it is portrayed in the policy and how it is shown in reality. The primarily source of this study is a document that describes the European Union's foreign policy through a global strategy. The global strategy will be analyzed through how it encourages the different theories in their policy. The study will then continue to examine how the difference between the policy and the reality becomes more concrete through the global strategy and different events on both an intern and an extern level. The results show that there is a large difference between the European Union's foreign policy and the reality.

This Bachelor of Arts paper in Media and Communication Studies from Stockholm University examines the image of Russia in Sweden in 1986 and 1993. I studied the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 in Pripyat, Ukraine in the former Soviet Union and the crisis in the White house in Moscow in today’s Russia in 1993. The aim of this paper is to examine how the view on former Soviet Union and today’s Russia was portrayed in Sweden after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. I have analysed 20 articles from Dagens Nyheter (DN) and Svenska Dagbladet (SvD). I have used “framing” as a method for analysing the articles in relation to Swedish foreign politics and foreign journalism. My research questions are following: what kind of problems, identifying causes, moral judgements and improvements to solutions were found in the investigated articles? What differences, if any, were discovered between DN and SvD’s journalism?   The results of my study showed that DN focused on general news reporting regarding the Chernobyl disaster and Sweden’s critique to the Soviet Union and the poor maintenance of the nuclear power station in a larger extent than SvD. Sweden was the first country to reveal abroad that they had discovered nuclear radiation on Swedish soil. DN framed, among others, how the Soviet Union was incapable of solving the Chernobyl crises on their own. SvD focused on how Sweden was affected by the Chernobyl disaster and the nuclear radiation. SvD framed how the Soviet Union kept quiet during the aftermath and how the Soviets tried to “conceal” information. Both DN and SvD framed the Soviet Union as “unpredictable”. After the crisis in the White house in Moscow DN and SvD were milder in their criticism towards Russia since there was a political and journalistic hope in Sweden that Russia would become a democratic country. Swedish foreign correspondents could therefore in 1993 create their own image of Russia since the Swedish foreign policy was not as clear after the events in Moscow in 1993 as they were after the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. Both newspapers focused on how Boris Yeltsin struggled to solve the crisis and Russia was now torn between the nostalgic Soviet communism and a new democratic Russia. DN and SvD received continually information about the events taking place in Moscow and reported how Russia was torn between a new tsar Russia/a new Soviet Union and a democratic Russia.

Många av dagens fredsfrämjande insatser genomförs i insatsområden som åtminstone vid en första anblick tycks vara av litet geopolitiskt eller ekonomiskt intresse för de intervenerande staterna. För svenskt vidkommande motiveras ibland Sveriges engagemang i exempelvis Afghanistan med att den terrorism och drogproduktion som härrör därifrån hotar och påverkar även människor i Sverige. Ytterligare en möjlig motivering har att göra med spridningsrisken; för att minska risken för spridning av en konflikt utanför det ursprungliga konfliktområdet intervenerar utomstående stater. Men vilken bild av den svenska statens motiv för att engagera Försvarsmakten i fredsfrämjande internationella insatser målas upp i riksdagsdebatten? Är argumenteringen rationell och visar de motiv som förs fram att Sverige faktiskt gynnas av att delta, eller grundar sig viljan att hjälpa till i att den svenska staten anser sig vara moraliskt förpliktigad att ingripa, om förmågan finns, då mänskliga rättigheter kränks? Föreliggande uppsats syftar till att klarlägga hur de två största, blockpolitiskt åtskilda riksdagspartierna motiverade besluten att deltaga i de internationella insatserna i Afghanistan och Libyen. Detta görs genom en argumentationsanalys, där de båda partiernas respektive argument struktureras och kategoriseras på ett överskådligt sätt. Resultatet från undersökningen är inte entydigt, men argument som tydligt anknyter till konkreta rationella vinster för Sverige används av båda partierna sparsamt. Istället ligger tyngdpunkten vid argument som har en närmare koppling till Sveriges nationella identitet och strategiska kultur. / Many of the peace supporting operations conducted today are undertaken in areas of operations with seemingly little geopolitical or economical interest to the intervening parties. From a Swedish perspective the contribution to the operations in for instance Afghanistan is sometimes motivated by stating that the terrorism and drug production that originates in Afghanistan threatens and effects even people living in Sweden. The risk of a potential expansion of the area of conflict is another plausible motivation to intervene for participating states. But how are the motives of the Swedish government to engage the Swedish Armed Forces in peace supporting operations depicted in Swedish Parliament debate? Is the argumentation rational and do the motives that are brought forward show that Sweden actually benefits from participating, or is the willingness to contribute derived from a sense of being morally obliged to take action, if capable, whenever human rights are violated? The essay in hand is intended to make clear how the two largest, policy divided, parties of the Swedish Parliament have motivated the decisions to participate in the international operations conducted in Afghanistan and Libya. This is accomplished through an argumentation analysis, in which the arguments of the two parties are structured and categorised in a perspicuous way. The results from the study are not unambiguous, but arguments that in a clear way are connected to rational Swedish benefits are sparsely used by both parties. The emphasis of the debate is rather on arguments with a close connection to the Swedish national identity and strategic culture.

The purpose with this study is to investigate how the two biggest political parties, the Social Democrats and the Moderate/Conservative Party, looks at a membership in the defense alliance North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The question have the illegal annexation of Crimea affected how the parties look at a membership in Nato will be answered and analyzed. How they discuss, how they believe that a membership can affect the Swedish foreign policy will be examined in this paper.   Nato is a topic that during the last century’s have divided the Swedish population into two groups: one that advocates a membership and one that fight’s against a Swedish membership in the alliance. The debate about Nato has, since the illegal annexation of the Crimea, changed and are now more relevant than ever to discuss. This paper illustrates how the Moderate/Conservative Party and the Social Democrats argues in the debate regarding a membership in Nato.   Since 2003 the Moderate/Conservative Party are in favor of a membership in the defense alliance Nato, what this paper will find out is why they want Sweden to become a member in Nato and how they argue for a membership. The Social Democrats are not in favor of a membership in the defense alliance, they advocates the defense line Sweden have had since the mid 1900s, the Non-alignment.

Turkey has often been described as a cultural and geographical bridge between West and East. When the Islamic AKP came to power in Turkey 2002 many critics feared that the country was going to abandon its former Western allies and strengthen their relations with the Arab world instead. The criticism was intensified when the AKP increased Turkey’s bilateral relations with the Middle East and moved closer to former foe’s like Iran and Syria, at the same time as their long-time friendship with Israel experienced serious crisis. The aim and purpose of this thesis is to describe and explain the change in AKP’s foreign policy towards Israel. The research method is a combination of a qualitative text analysis of Turkey’s speeches in the UN General debate and Jakob Gustavsson’s model for explaining foreign policy change. The results show that the Turkish-Israeli relations have deteriorated after the Israeli attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in 2010, particularly regarding diplomatic relations and military agreements. Based on Gustavsson’s model, possible explanations to AKP’s foreign policy change towards Israel, is structural changes such as a growing economy, a strong Turkish public opinion and new partners, with the Gaza war and the attack on the Freedom Flotilla functioning as catalysts for the deterioration.

Syftet med uppsatsen är att utreda handlingskapaciteten av EU:s utrikespolitik. Irakkrisen valdes som empiriskt exempel där EU ansågs ha lidit av handlingsförlamning. Tecken på handlingsförlamningen var avsaknaden av en gemensam position samt en effektiv ståndpunkt. Syftet är därför att utreda varför en gemensam ståndpunkt inte presenterades. Uppsatsen diskuterar även om resultatet är specifikt för Irakkrisen eller om det är generellt för den europeiska utrikespolitiken. Två modeller som förklarar handlingskapacitet används för att utreda Irakkrisen. Modellerna är uppbyggda av variabler som förklarar handlingskapacitet. Den första modellen inkluderar självständighet, sammanhållning, auktoritet och erkännande. Modell två använder tillfälle/möjlighet, närvaro och kapacitet. Modell ett visar att EU saknade auktoritet, vilket påverkade de övriga variablerna negativt. Resultatet anses vara generellt för den europeiska utrikespolitiken snarare än specifikt för Irakkrisen, eftersom auktoritet enbart kan förändras i en bearbetning av fördragen. Sammanhållning kan bero på fallet men på grund av komplexiteten i utrikespolitik är det en stor risk att även sammanhållning kan brista. Modell två framhåller en process där EU skapar sig en roll i världspolitiken. Rollen förstärks genom EU:s agerande. Den roll som EU har skapat sig antyder inte en enhet som agerar krig, utan är snarare förenlig med återuppbyggandet efter krig. Idén om EU har konsekvenser för vad ett tillfälle/möjlighet innebär, likaså för EU:s kapacitets trovärdighet. Eftersom rollen skapas i en process som sker över tiden så är risken stor att de svårigheter som resultatet belyser är generella. Det vill säga att problematiken troligen kommer återfinnas i liknande kriser. / The aim of the thesis is to evaluate the actorness of EU’s foreign policy. The crisis in Iraqwas chosen as an empirical example, where the EU was considered to have suffered from incapacity. Signs of the incapacity were the lack of a common position and effective statements. The aim is therefore to evaluate why there was no common position presented. The thesis furthermore discusses whether the result is specific for the Iraq crisis, or if it is general for the European foreign policy. Two models explaining actorness are used to evaluate the crisis in Iraq. The models are constituted by variables explaining actorness. The first model includes autonomy, cohesion, authority and recognition. Model two uses opportunity, presence and capacity. Model one shows that EU lacked in authority, which affected the remaining variables negatively. The result is considered general to the European foreign policy, rather than specific to the Iraq crisis, since authority can only be changed in a revision of the treaties. The cohesion may depend on the case, but due to the complexity of foreign policy there is a great risk that it may also fail. Model two emphasises a process where the EU creates a role for itself in world politics. The role is enforced by the EU’s actions. The role that the EU has created does not suggest an entity that acts in war, but is rather more compatible with the rebuilding after war. The idea of the EU has consequences for what constitutes an opportunity, as well as for the credibility of EU’s capacity. Since the role is created in a process that takes place over time there is a great risk that the problems, that the result elucidates, are general and not specific to the Iraq crisis.

Syftet med vår uppsats är att undersöka diskursen om utrikespolitik ur ett svenskt perspektiv. I uppsatsen undersöker vi hur svenska politiker diskuterar dagens och framtidens svenska utrikespolitik. Studien bygger på intervjuer med sju av ledamöterna i riksdagens utrikesutskott. I analysen av dessa ledamöters utsagor utgår vi från ett diskursanalytiskt perspektiv och använder diskursteorin som verktyg. Svensk utrikespolitik har i historien ofta förknippats med neutralitetstänkande och främjandet av värderingar såsom mänskliga rättigheter och nedrustning. I och med utvecklingen av en gemensam utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik för Europa pågår dock en diskussion om vad svensk utrikespolitik är idag. Likaså pågår idag en akademisk debatt om hur utrikespolitik ska förstås i en alltmer internationaliserad värld. Till följd av detta är vår studie av svenska politikers föreställningar om utrikespolitik i allra högsta grad befogad. Vi konstaterar i vår studie att både enighet och meningsskiljaktigheter förekommer i den diskurs om utrikespolitik som de intervjuade ledamöterna ger uttryck för. Under våra intervjuer framkom framförallt att utrikespolitik definieras som relationer mellan stater och staters rätt att bedriva utrikespolitik motiverades med hänvisning till att medborgarna i en stat har en gemensam identitet. Det blev också tydligt att grupptillhörighet ofta uppfattades påverka det europeiska utrikespolitiska samarbetet. Sammanfattningsvis kan vi alltså konstatera att ett djupt rotat identitetstänkande tycks vara tongivande för synen på utrikespolitik. / The purpose of our essay is to investigate the discourse of foreign policy from a Swedish perspective. In this essay we explore how Swedish politicians discuss the Swedish foreign policy of today and of the future. The study is based on interviews with seven members of The Advisory Council on Foreign Affairs of the Swedish Riksdag. The point of departure for our analysis of these members’ narratives is discourse analysis and discourse theory. In history Swedish foreign policy has been associated with neutrality and the work for important values such as human rights and disarmament. However, as a consequence of the development of a common foreign and security policy for Europe, there is a debate concerning what Swedish foreign policy is today. Furthermore, there is today an academic debate about how foreign policy is to be understood in a more and more internationalized world. This makes our study of the understanding of foreign policy of Swedish politicians highly legitimate. In our study we show that both unity and difference of opinion is present in the discourse of foreign policy that the interviewees give voice to. During our interviews we found that foreign policy was defined as relations between states and that the right of states to pursue foreign policy was commonly seen as derived from the thought that citizens of a state share a common identity. During the interviews it also became obvious that feelings of belonging to a certain group were thought to affect European foreign policy cooperation. To sum up the results of our study we conclude that a deeply rooted sense of identity seem to be very influential when it comes to the understanding of foreign policy.

No description available.

This study examines the South Korea President Park Geun-hye and United States President Obama respective administration's policy vis-à-vis North Korea. The scope is narrowed down to the year 2013, during which the regime in Pyongyang conducted its third nuclear test. How to perceive and engage the regime in Pyongyang have been debated in the post-cold war era, divided into progressive (doves) and hard liners (hawks). Periods of policy discrepancy have occurred between Washington and Seoul, that have been observed to bear effect on North Korean behavior vis-à-vis South Korea. This study ties on to the contemporary policy debate in Seoul and Washington on North Korean engagement strategies. Moreover, expanding the scope and examines the respective administration's policy through a analytical framework based on a content analysis from a system level perspective. Furthermore, how neo-realism, neo-liberalism and the concept of reciprocity can shed light upon respective policies and give a sense of notion of alignment or discrepancy between Seoul and Washington.

Syftet med denna uppsats är att undersöka begreppet ‘mjuk makt’. Mjuk makt är en relativt ny term som myntades av statsvetaren Joseph Nye år 1990. Sedan dess har detta nya begrepp förändrat hur vi ser på internationell makt. Genom användandet av attraktion och lockelse använder sig stater av mjuk makt för att få inflytande. Motsatsen till mjuk makt, hård makt, är ett annat verktyg som stater använder för att genom att hota eller framkalla resultat få inflytande. Dessa två verktyg och deras användbarhet har blivit ett ämne för debatt i den nuvarande diskursen inom internationell politik. Begreppet mjuk makt utvecklas konstant och formas av experter och politiker världen runt som har omfamnat termen. Mjuk makt har sina svagheter; den är svår att mäta och analysera, det är även svårt för en stat att använda mjuk makt aktivt. Men det har blivit ett livsnödvändigt verktyg under detta århundrade för att maximera effektiviteten för en stats utrikespolitik.   Det empiriska materialet i denna uppsats grundas mest på svensk mjuk makt, men det inkluderar även diverse stormakter och deras mjuka makt. Genom att använda kvalitativ textanalys har jag försökt urskilja vad som är relativt för min uppsats och vad som är de viktigaste sakerna att inkludera. / The purpose of this essay is to examine the concept of ‘soft power’. Soft power is a relatively new term that was coined by the political scientist Joseph Nye in the year 1990. Since then this new term has changed how we today perceive international power. Using attraction and appeal actors use soft power to try to gain influence. The opposite of soft power, hard power, is another tool that states use to gain influence by trying to induce or threaten. These two tools and their usefulness for a state have become a topic of debate in the current international politics discourse. The concept of soft power is constantly evolving and it is being shaped by experts and politicians around the world who embrace the term. Soft power does have its weaknesses; it is hard to measure and analyze, and it is also hard for a state to use soft power actively. But it has become a tool that is vital for states in the 21st century to maximize the effectiveness of one’s foreign policy. The empirical material in this essay is partially based on Swedish soft power, but also includes various greater powers and their soft power. Using qualitative content analysis I have tried to discern what is relative to the essay and what are the most vital things to include.