The European Border and Coast Guard Agency, also known as Frontex, works with issues related to migration and transnational crime via various practical approaches such as: Multilateral cooperation, border surveillance, and information sharing. By viewing these practical approaches as means of power resources, Frontex's ways in dealing with migration and crime becomes interesting to study. Based on Joseph Nye’s theory on Soft Power, this essay focuses on discovering whether Frontex's approach to migration and transnational crime can be compared to soft or hard means of power - which of these theoretical schools is more prominent, or, are there equal aspects from both schools? Using a discourse analysis, I create themes in order to sort signs of soft power versus signs of hard power more easily in the present text material. Thus, the method regards the interpretation of the EU regulation that forms the textual basis for this study, in order to produce useful concepts that constitutes signs of means of power. The results of this study provides a variety of power resources that are similar to either soft power or hard power, that altogether allows for a nuanced view of Frontex’s activity.

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.

No description available.

The aim of this essay was to examine what problems, causes and solutions three Swedish governments identified concerning three decisions of cooperation with NATO, and to understand these decisions with constructivism and hard and soft power as theoretical perspectives. The first was the decision to join Partnership for Peace in 1994. The second decision was to join the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council in 1997. The third decision was to join a host nation support with NATO in 2016. The analysis showed that problems regarding PfP was an unpredictable security situation, caused by the fall of the Soviet Union. This gave rise to new conflicts, e.g. the conflict in Yugoslavia. Russia was identified as a problem also regarding the EAPC, caused by a Russian superpower identity. Problems identified before joining the HNS was that Russia was aggressive and annexed the Ukrainian peninsula Crimea in 2014. This was caused by the Russian leadership prioritizing the defence sector. The identified problems and causes can be understood with the theory of hard power, since the Russian hard power resources are wielded both within and outside of Russia. Constructivism is useful to understand what solutions the governments proposed, since they often express an ambition to build a common identity, while keeping the Swedish identity as non-aligned. Also, soft power resources made the alliance more attractive for the Swedish governments.

This thesis examines India’s exercise of its powers that it utilizes in its foreign policy on the international arena. The aim of the study is to determine what international power India can be classified as, and whether it achieves the goals of either being a great- or superpower. This is done by analysing not only the conventional concept of power, that being the hard power concept, but also the relatively newly conceived concept of soft power, originally conceived by the American political scientist Joseph Nye in the 1990s. Therefore, the research methodology is comprised of a theory consuming case study. The following question is being asked: What kind of international power is India? The conclusions being presented illustrate a foreign policy limited in its scope of influence, plagued mostly by institutional impediments due to limited budgets and thus limited resources in both concepts of power. Consequently, India cannot be classified either as a superpower nor a greatpower, but more as a regional one.