Thesis (MA)--University of Stellenbosch, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: African affairs have traditionally not occupied a central place in Norway’s official foreign policy, and relations with countries in West Africa have been limited. However, in recent years, resource-rich countries such as Angola – Africa’s largest oil producer – have become the focus of Norwegian strategic interests. Private and public investments are increasing rapidly, paralleling a larger focus on aid. Today, Angola is a core country within Norway’s most prominent petroleum-related assistant programme, Oil for Development (OfD). This thesis will aim to contribute, by means of a critical political economy analysis, to a better understanding of Norway’s role in Angola through OfD. Specifically, this study aims to question who and what structures Norway really is aiding in Angola. Such an objective will be achieved by firstly using critical theory to demonstrate Norway’s role as a traditional middle power – through which Norway seeks to export an altruistic perception of a ‘do-good- image’ – is underpinned by a deeper national self-interest. Secondly, the thesis questions the theoretical foundation of OfD, and, thirdly, it attempts to identify whom the OfD programme is aiding. Ultimately, the thesis questions whether Norway is promoting sustainable development in Angola, or whether, instead, it is contributing to maintaining a status quo, from which Norway as a middle power continues to benefit. The study illustrates that Norway, as a middle power, has neither the capacity nor the national self-interest to achieve fundamental change in Angola. Norway’s commitment to the good governance agenda, and the belief in solutions offered by the resource curse thesis, is tackling the symptoms of Angola’s underdevelopment, rather than its root causes. OfD adopts a state-centric approach, which accepts the political economy structures in Angola, and gives limited attention to global structures and civil society. The thesis offers an alternative analysis, which illustrates how OfD is masking a neo-liberal development approach by incorporating Norwegian business interests and development goals in the same programme. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Afrika sake het tradisioneel nie 'n sentrale plek in Noorweë se amptelike buitelandse beleid beklee nie, en verhoudings met die westelike deel van die Afrika-kontinent is beperk. Tydens die afgelope jare het olie-ryk lande, soos Angola, egter die fokus van Noorweegse strategiese belange geword. Angola is vandag 'n kern land binne Noorweë se mees prominente petroleum-verwante hulpverleningsprogram, Oil for Development (OfD). Hierdie tesis het ten doel om, deur middel van 'n kritiese politieke ekonomie ontleding, by te dra tot ’n beter begrip van Noorweë se rol in Angola deur die OfD. Spesifiek bevraagteken hierdie studie aan wie en watter strukture in Angola Noorweë hulp verleen. Dit sal gedoen word deur eerstens gebruik te maak van kritiese teorie om te demonstreer dat Noorweë se rol as 'n tradisionele middelmoondheid – waardeur Noorweë poog om 'n altruïstiese persepsie van die staat uit te dra – onderskryf word deur 'n dieper nasionale selfbelang. Tweedens sal hierdie studie die teoretiese begronding van OfD bevraagteken, en derdens poog om te identifiseer wie deur die OfD program ondersteun word. Laastens sal die tesis bevraagteken of Noorweë volhoubare ontwikkeling in Angola bevorder, en eerder bydra tot die instandhouding van die status quo, waaruit Noorweë as 'n middelmoondheid voordeel trek. Die studie sal illustreer dat Noorweë, as ‘n middelmoondheid, nie die kapasiteit of die nasionale selfbelang het om fundamentele verandering in Angola te weeg te bring nie. Norweë se ondersteuning van die ‘good governance’ agenda, en oplossings wat deur die sogenaamde ‘hulpbronvloek’ tesis aangebied word, spreek die simptome van Angola se onder-ontwikkeldheid aan, eerder as die kernoorsake. OfD funksioneer op grond van ‘n staat-sentriese benadering, wat die politieke ekonomiese strukture in Angola aanvaar, en beperkte aandag aan globale strukture en die burgerlike samelewing gee. Hierdie tesis bied ‘n alternatiewe analise, wat wys hoe OfD eintlik ‘n neoliberale ontwikkelingsbenadering volg wat Noorweegse besigheids- en ontwikkelingsdoelwitte in dieselfde program inkorporeer.

This study is a contribution to the literature on South Africa's foreign policy since 2000-2004. It provides a theoretical framework within which South Africa's foreign policy should be understood. It attempts to explain the contradictions that have been apparent in South Africa's foreign policy by looking at the constraints inherent in South Africa's position as an emerging middle power. It argues that South Africa's pluralist inclinations are constrained by Africa's evolving multilateral forums and that South Africa's preference for such undermines the realization and achievement of her foreign policy principles and goals. It also argues that as a realist middle power, South Africa is constrained the ambivalence shown by the region towards her exercising leadership in the region. This is due to South Africa's history of destruction in Southern Africa in the 1980's. South Africa's quiet diplomacy towards Zimbabwe provides the focal point for the study. The study argues that it is not the case that South Africa is not concerned with human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. Instead, this concern has been expressed in ways that do not tarnish South Africa's own image in Africa. This has been done by engaging Zimbabweans through multilateral forums. This study concludes that this strategy failed to bring about resolution to the Zimbabwean crisis.

No description available.

Thesis (MA (Political Science. International Studies))--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / Post-apartheid foreign policy has witnessed a fundamental shift in South African foreign policy objectives and strategies as the country has aimed to move from a pariah to a participant in the international community. Since 1994, South Africa has become an active player in the international system and has assumed an increasingly active role in international organisations. One distinct strand of South African foreign policy which has emerged is a commitment to the use and support of multilateralism. Yet, as the country has become increasingly active in multilateral fora, so too, it is argued, has it been torn between the promotion of its own interests and those of its African peers. At times South Africa is seen to vociferously champion African interests, and at others to sideline the interests of its African partners and the notion of the African Renaissance, in favour of its own interests. Yet, whilst inconsistencies in South African multilateral foreign policy exist, this study argues that overall, South Africa has actively and consciously attempted to establish itself as an African middle power within the international system, and to create a distinct niche for itself as “the voice of Africa” in multilateral fora. Employing a Middle Power approach and utilising the concept of niche-building diplomacy this study investigates first, South Africa’s middle power niche in the international system at large, before, secondly, investigating South Africa’s role at the World Trade Organisation. The study concludes that, while South Africa has continually attempted to establish itself as “the voice of Africa” in a range of multilateral fora and has acted in a manner consistent with this stated objective, it has acted contrary to its established niche at the World Trade Organisation since joining this organisation in 1994. Indeed, this study finds that whereas in other multilateral fora South Africa has acted as the standard-bearer of African interests, in the World Trade Organisation it has acted contrary to African interests time and again. The findings indicate that the Middle Power concept in international relations itself needs to be revisited, that South Africa’s role as a middle power in the international system requires greater investigation, and that further research is required on the roles played by other middle powers at the World Trade Organisation.

Approved for public release; distribution in unlimited. / The dynamics in U.S.-Turkey relations in both 1964 and 2003 continued to be between a large global power and a medium regional power in the framework of a global threat that required regional cooperation. In both cases the priority of the global power was the fight against the global threat and this created expectations from the medium power ally in the region, who -in both cases- had its own reservations about the issue, considering its own national interests. The analysis of the 1964 Crisis shows that both U.S. and Turkey would have five main sources of influence over their foreign policy decisions leading to disagreement in 1964: the dynamics in the U.S. Turkish relations as one between a global power and a regional partner; domestic concerns of both countries; unaligned goals of the two parties; the international circumstances; and the influence of signaling failures and previous interactions. When we analyze the 2003 Crisis in light of these findings we see that all the main issues seem to be consistently relevant, though their effects might have changed slightly. Overall, both cases reveal that the above-mentioned five factors determine the outcome of interactions between large global powers and medium powers in the region. / 1st Lieutenant, Turkish Army