“The Proletarian Prometheus: Socialism, Ethnicity, and Revolution at the Lakehead, 1900-1935” is an analysis of the various socialist organizations operating at the Canadian Lakehead (comprised of the twin cities of Port Arthur and Fort William, Ontario, now the present-day City of Thunder Bay, and their vicinity) during the first 35 years of the twentieth century. It contends that the circumstances and actions of Lakehead labour, especially those related to ideology, ethnicity, and personality, worked simultaneously to empower and to fetter workers in their struggles against the shackles of capitalism. The twentieth-century Lakehead never lacked for a population of enthusiastic, energetic and talented left-wingers. Yet, throughout this period the movement never truly solidified and took hold. Socialist organizations, organizers and organs came and went, leaving behind them an enduring legacy, yet paradoxically the sum of their efforts was cumulatively less than the immense sacrifices and energies they had poured into them. Between 1900 and 1935, the region's working-class politics was shaped by the interaction of ideas drawn from the much larger North Atlantic socialist world with the particularities of Lakehead society and culture. International frameworks of analysis and activism were of necessity reshaped and revised in a local context in which ethnic divisions complicated and even undermined the class identities upon which so many radical dreams and ambitions rested. / Thesis (Ph.D, History) -- Queen's University, 2007-12-14 20:26:40.652

The Social Democratic Party and the Moderate Party are two parties with different ideological background. The parties have different opinions in issues of public and private matters. The Social Democratic Party profiles it self, through the local and national party programs, as a party for solidarity and security. The Moderate Party, on the other hand, profiles it self through their programmes as a party with a possibility for the individual to shape his or her own life. Through a survey on members in the local government, and two key persons at national level, the view of municipal self-government has appeared. The party programmes constitute a platform for the parties´ views on municipal self-government. These views have been put together with the result of the survey. Urban Strandberg has designed an analysis frame related to municipal self-government. His concept, municipalities’ basic character, board of directors and administration, is the theoretical foundation of the thesis. The content of the Party programmes and the results of the survey are thendiscussed within the frame of Strandbergs concept and Demokratiutredningens rapport SOU 2000:1. From the collective perspective of the theory, the content of party programmes and the result of the survey an image of the parties’ views on municipal self-government starts to grow. Within each party respectively, they keep a common strategy in important issues, which the local governments and the parties’ basic characters have raised. There are dividing lines due to the administration of the municipalities. Civic participation unites the parties in ideological issues. The opinions, in the issue of municipal self-government, differs between the Social Democratic Party and the Moderate Party. The reason for that is because of their fundamental different views in the fields of social order and ideology, as it is described in the party programmes. In reality when the parties shape the politics they cannot profile themselves as much as in the"vision"in their party programmes. The parties have to find a middle course, which is reflected in the answers from some of the respondents.

This study uses variables derived from Rational Choice Theory to examine the theory’s predicted covariancebetween public opinion and the parties’ policies. The collection of material has been guided by three arenas: the parliamentarian, the media and the voter’s. It has categorized the analysis based on the strategy concept, using ends, means and ways. It asks how the Moderate Party and the Social Democratic Party changed their strategy within the period of 31 May 2013 and 14 September 2014, and how this can be understood from a rational choice perspective. The purpose of the study is to examine the assumptions of Rational Choice Theory in the Swedish context in front of the election in 2014, and to understand this from the perspective of the theory. This can help in our understanding of defense policy formation and to our understanding of states’ relations on the international arena. The results show that there has been a more ambitious change in defense policy which covariates with the indicated positive change in public opinion on defense issues, but this did not make defense issues one of the 2014 election’s most important questions for the voters in choice of party to vote for. This can be understood as rational, seen from a RCT-perspective, since the other issues renders more support, a circumstance that is in line with the history of Swedish elections.

In this study I examine the decisions to sign and later terminate the so called Saudi agreement, a military memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Sweden and Saudi Arabia, understood as a gateway agreement for future arms deals as well as exchange of defense technology knowledge. Comparing statements from the Social Democratic Party (SAP), who held government both in 2005 when the agreement was signed as well as in 2015 when it was terminated unilaterally by Sweden, I examine the ideological preferences of Swedish foreign policy. Could the shift in policy be explained by ideology?

Cette thèse de doctorat est une biographie politique de Paul Levi, militant marxiste qui a fait carrière en Allemagne durant la période de l’entre-deux-guerres. Dès 1914, Levi incarne un courant radical à l’intérieur du Parti social-démocrate d’Allemagne (SPD). Il dénonce, entre autres, aux côtés de Rosa Luxemburg l’appui du parti à l’effort militaire national. Levi s’inspire également de Lénine qu’il rencontre pour la première fois en Suisse en 1916-1917. Lorsqu’il prend les commandes du Parti communiste d’Allemagne (KPD) en 1919, Levi dirige celui-ci d’une main de fer, selon le concept du « centralisme démocratique ». Il fait également tout en son pouvoir pour faire éclater la révolution ouvrière en Allemagne afin d’installer une dictature du prolétariat qui exclurait toutes les classes non ouvrières du pouvoir. En ce sens, Levi imagine un État socialiste semblable à celui fondé par Lénine en Russie en 1917. Contrairement à l’historiographie traditionnelle, notre thèse montre conséquemment que Levi n’était guère un « socialiste démocrate ». Il était plutôt un militant marxiste qui, par son radicalisme, a contribué à diviser le mouvement ouvrier allemand ce qui, en revanche, a fragilisé la république de Weimar. Cette thèse fait également ressortir le caractère résolument rebelle de Paul Levi. Partout où il passe, Levi dénonce les politiques bourgeoises des partis non-ouvriers, mais aussi celles de la majorité des organisations dont il fait partie, c’est-à-dire les partis ouvriers de la république de Weimar et le Reichstag. Son tempérament impulsif fait de lui un homme politique isolé qui, d’ailleurs, se fait de nombreux ennemis. En 1921, à titre d’exemple, il se brouille avec d’importants bolcheviques, ce qui met fin à sa carrière au sein du KPD. Les communistes voient désormais en lui un ennemi de la classe ouvrière et mènent contre lui de nombreuses campagnes diffamatoires. Levi, de son côté, dénonce ouvertement la terreur stalinienne qui, selon lui, est en train de contaminer le mouvement communiste européen. Notre travail montre également que Levi, cette fois en tant qu’avocat juif, lutte corps et âme contre les nazis. En 1926, dans le cadre d’une commission d’enquête publique du Reichstag chargée de faire la lumière sur des meurtres politiques commis en Bavière, il tente par tous les moyens d’inculper certains criminels nazis. Levi est conséquemment la cible de la presse antisémite allemande. Il refuse toutefois de céder à l’intimidation et choisit plutôt de poursuivre en justice quelques-uns des plus importants membres du Parti nazi, dont Alfred Rosenberg et Hitler lui-même, en plus de forcer de nombreux autres nazis à comparaître devant la commission d’enquête du Reichstag. Bref, si ce travail se veut critique envers la pensée révolutionnaire de Levi, il souligne aussi l’intégrité politique de cet homme dont les convictions sont demeurées inébranlables face aux dérives criminelles des extrêmes idéologiques de son époque. / This Ph.D. thesis is a political biography of Paul Levi, a German Marxist of the interwar period. Already in 1914, Levi embodied a radical faction within the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). Alongside Rosa Luxemburg, the leader of this same left wing, he is contesting, above all, the party’s participation in the national war effort. But Levi is also inspired by Lenin, who he met in Switzerland in 1916-1917. In fact, when taking over the leadership of the German Communist Party (KPD) in March 1919, Levi ruled with an iron fist according to the theory of “democratic centralism”. As Lenin has done in Russia in October 1917, Levi also did everything in his power to promote a workers’ revolution in Germany in order to set in power a dictatorship of the proletariat, which would exclude all other social classes from sitting in the government. Consequently, in opposition to traditional historiography, this thesis shows that Levi was not a “democratic Socialist” of the Luxemburg school, but rather a Marxist whose political thought resembled that of the Bolsheviks. In fact, his action contributed to further weaken an already frail Weimar Republic and all its democratic institutions. This study also shows that Levi’s outstanding career was in large part the result of his rebellious character. Throughout his life, Levi consistently denounced the bourgeois politics of the non-workers’ parties, but he also systematically went against the majority within the political organizations in which he took part: the workers’ parties and the Reichstag. His impulsive nature set him apart as a solitary politician. In fact, Levi had many enemies. In 1921, he ran afoul of major Bolshevik leaders, which caused him to lose the leadership of the KPD. The Communists subsequently saw him as an enemy of the working class, slandering him in the press and in the Reichstag. Levi denounced, for his part, the Stalinist terror and made a mockery of the KPD, which had become, according to him, no more than a Soviet puppet. But this thesis also reveals that Levi, as a Jewish lawyer, led a major political campaign against the Nazis. In 1926, for example, as he served on a Reichstag public commission investigating Bavarian political assassinations, he tried by all possible means to charge important Nazis with murder. The Nazi press replied with a vicious anti-Semitic press campaign against him. Levi, however, refused to kneel before such intimidation and rather chose to sue important Nazi leaders, such as Alfred Rosenberg and Hitler himself before the court, in addition to summoning many others before the above-mentioned Reichstag commission. In the end, despite the fact that this study very critically evaluates Levi’s ideology, it praises his political integrity, which remained unshakable though faced with adversity and the criminal drift of the political extremes of the interwar period.

Cette thèse porte sur les conceptions d’Egon Bahr dans le domaine de la politique à l’Est (Ostpolitik) de la République fédérale d’Allemagne (RFA) entre 1945 et 1975. L’analyse se concentre sur le lien entre l’Ostpolitik et l’idée que Bahr se fait de la place et du rôle de l’Allemagne en Europe. Plus précisément, cette étude veut cerner les buts poursuivis par Bahr dans le cadre de la politique orientale. La première partie traite du développement conceptuel de l’Ostpolitik (1945-1969), tandis que la seconde examine sa mise en application entre l’élection de Willy Brandt comme chancelier de la RFA et la conclusion des accords d’Helsinki (1969-1975). Les principales sources utilisées sont les écrits de Bahr ainsi que des documents inédits se trouvant dans divers centres d’archives non seulement en Allemagne, mais aussi aux États-Unis, en France et en Grande-Bretagne. Pour Bahr, l’Ostpolitik ne saurait se résumer à l’élimination des obstacles qui gênent la diplomatie ouest-allemande durant la guerre froide. Bahr poursuit plutôt un projet nationaliste ambitieux dans le contexte des relations avec le bloc soviétique : créer les conditions d’une redéfinition de la place de l’Allemagne en Europe. Pour lui, l’Ostpolitik constitue un instrument idéal pour faire de l’Allemagne la puissance prépondérante dans un nouvel ordre de paix européen. Trois éléments complémentaires participent à l’accomplissement de cette vision : 1) la consolidation de la paix et de la sécurité continentales; 2) la réunification allemande et 3) l’émancipation de la politique étrangère (ouest-)allemande. Cette thèse éclaire la pensée politique de Bahr et contribue à une meilleure compréhension de la signification de l’Ostpolitik dans le contexte plus large de la politique étrangère de la RFA. Les conceptions de Bahr sont uniques dans l’Allemagne de la guerre froide parce qu’elles sont centrées sur les notions de puissance, d’intérêt national et de « normalité ». En même temps, Bahr comprend que la coopération doit toujours rester l’instrument diplomatique privilégié des Allemands vu leur position géographique centrale. À travers le prisme des conceptions de son « architecte », l’Ostpolitik apparaît comme un véritable effort de réconciliation entre la paix en Europe et l’affirmation de l’influence allemande sur la scène internationale. / This thesis deals with Egon Bahr’s understanding of the Federal Republic of Germany’s (FRG) Eastern policy (Ostpolitik) between 1945 and 1975. The analysis is centered on the link between Ostpolitik and Bahr’s conception of Germany’s position and role in the European system. More precisely, this study aims at finding out which goals Bahr pursued in the context of Bonn’s Eastern policy. The first part of the thesis deals with the conceptual development of Ostpolitik (1945-1969). The second part takes a look at its implementation for the period between Willy Brandt’s election as West German Chancellor and the conclusion of the Helsinki Final Act (1969-1975). This thesis relies primarily on Bahr’s writings, including a vast number of unpublished sources, located mostly in German archives, but also in American, French and British archives. According to Bahr, Ostpolitik was not limited to the elimination of West Germany’s burdens in foreign policy during the Cold War. In fact, he pursued an ambitious, nationalistic project in the context of relations with the Soviet bloc. Bahr sought to create the necessary conditions for Germany to redefine its place in Europe. With Ostpolitik as his diplomatic instrument, his ultimate goal was to see Germany become the central power in a new European peace order. Three interrelated objectives formed the core of this vision: 1) the consolidation of peace and security on the continent; 2) German reunification and 3) the emancipation of (West) German foreign policy. This thesis sheds new light on Bahr’s political thought and contributes to a better understanding of Ostpolitik’s significance in the larger context of West German foreign policy. Bahr’s conceptions were unique in Cold War Germany because they were based on notions of power, the national interest and “normality”. At the same time, Bahr understood that Germans, because of their central geographic position, always had to rely on cooperation as the prime instrument of all their diplomatic initiatives. Through its “architect”, Ostpolitik appears as an effort at reconciliation between a peaceful Europe and the unhindered affirmation of German influence in world affairs.

La construction européenne fut entre la conférence de La Haye en 1969 et la signature de l’Acte unique européen en 1986, une entreprise d’intégration des sociétés européennes principalement économique, notamment fondée sur la libre circulation des marchandises, des hommes mais aussi des services et des capitaux. Ce projet de marché unique transnational fut un défi inouï lancé aux Etats et aux partis politiques qui organisent l’expression politique au sein de chaque nation. Deux partis, profondément enracinés par leur identité socialiste et démocratique dans la vie de leur nation et également mus par l’idéal européen, le parti social-démocrate d’Allemagne (SPD) et le Parti socialiste français (PS), furent, par l’action de leurs dirigeants au pouvoir, étroitement associés à la réalisation du projet européen.Ces partis furent-ils des acteurs qui imprimèrent la marque du socialisme démocratique à la construction européenne ou l’accompagnèrent-ils sans en corriger les traits originaux ? Ont-ils façonné le modèle économique de l’intégration européenne ou s’est-il imposé à eux ? Partant, cette expérience européenne les conduisit-elle à préserver ou à modifier leur identité ? Notre recherche nous conduit ainsi à étudier la rencontre entre deux utopies, l’utopie européenne et l’utopie du socialisme démocratique et à mesurer l’extrême difficulté pour ces deux partis de créer un modèle qui fasse converger ces deux caractéristiques du PS et du SPD et leur permette de rester des forces politiques d’avenir, riches de propositions partagées à l’échelle européenne. / Between the conference of The Hague (1965) and the signing of the Single European Act (1986), the European Construction was foremost an economic endeavour aiming at integrating the European societies and based on the free movement of goods, people, services and money. The creation of the common market was an extraordinary challenge for the nation states and for the political parties which are responsible for the expression of the political life of their nation. Two parties, the French socialist party (PS) and the social-democratic party of Germany (SPD), both deeply rooted in the political life of their own nation, with a socialist and democratic identity, but also moved by European ideals, were greatly involved in the realisation of the European project, mainly through the action of their leaders when these were exercising their national responsibilities and ruling their nation.Thus the questioning: did these parties leave the mark of democratic socialism on the European construction or did they only accompany it without correcting the original features? Did they participate in the definition of the European economic model or not? And in turn, did the European construction lead them to preserve or to modify their identity?Our inquiry leads us to study how two utopian ideas, the path towards democratic socialism and the path towards European unity, interfere. The extreme difficulty for both parties to create a convergence between these two paths could prevent them from remaining political strengths with great future at national and European scale.

Cette thèse propose une analyse des notions de justice sociale et d'État-providence au prisme de la politique sociale du SPD dans les années 1980. À la fois parti d'opposition au Bundestag à Bonn et parti au pouvoir dans certains Länder en RFA, le SPD se trouvait dans une position ambiguë, propre au fédéralisme allemand. Afin de peser sur les réformes sociales initiées par le ministre du Travail Norbert Blüm (CDU) pour résoudre la crise de l'État-providence, les sociaux-démocrates adoptèrent une stratégie alternant opposition et coopération avec le gouvernement Kohl. Dans le même temps, ils engagèrent un travail de refondation programmatique en vue de reconquérir le pouvoir en 1990. Aux divisions générationnelles communément admises par la recherche se substitua une fracture entre une « aile sociale » adepte d'une politique traditionnelle et une « aile réformatrice » sensible aux valeurs post-matérialistes et « écosocialistes ». Du fait de son immédiateté, le processus d'unification de l'Allemagne (1989-1990) constitua un révélateur permettant de juger, à l'épreuve des faits, la validité des programmes et des discours sociaux-démocrates. Malgré les propositions concrètes de Rudolf Dreßler pour améliorer l'union sociale entre la RFA et la RDA, le SPD ne parvint ni à se faire entendre sur la question de l'unité allemande ni à imposer sa volonté de refonder l'État-providence. Les réserves d'Oskar Lafontaine sur l'emballement des coûts économiques et sociaux contribuèrent à entretenir la confusion concernant la position du SPD sur l'unité allemande. / This doctoral thesis analyses the concepts of social justice and the welfare state in light of the social policies of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) in the 1980s. Both in the opposition in the Bundestag in Bonn and in office in some West German Länders, the SPD found itself in an ambiguous position, peculiar to German federalism. The Social Democrats took on a strategy based alternatively on opposition and cooperation with Helmut Kohl’s government, in order to influence the welfare reforms introduced by the Labour Minister Norbert Blüm (Christian Democratic Union, CDU). The SPD simultaneously started to overhaul its political platform with a view to taking back power in 1990. The generational conflicts, which have been widely established by researchers, gave way to a new divide between a “social wing” advocating a traditional policy and a “reforming wing” drawn towards post-materialist and “eco-socialist” values. By virtue of its immediacy, the German unification process (1989-1990) proved to be a litmus test, which allowed the efficiency of the SDP’s agenda and rhetoric to be evaluated. In spite of Rudolf Dreßler’s concrete propositions to improve the social union between East and West Germany, the SDP failed both to share its views on German unification and to impose its determination to overhaul the welfare state. Oskar Lafontaine’s reservations about the economic and social costs spiralling out of control contributed to a blurring of the lines on the SDP’s position on German unification.This doctoral thesis analyses the concepts of social justice and the welfare state in light of the social policies of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) in the 1980s. Both in the opposition in the Bundestag in Bonn and in office in some West German Länders, the SPD found itself in an ambiguous position, peculiar to German federalism. The Social Democrats took on a strategy based alternatively on opposition and cooperation with Helmut Kohl’s government, in order to influence the welfare reforms introduced by the Labour Minister Norbert Blüm (Christian Democratic Union, CDU). The SPD simultaneously started to overhaul its political platform with a view to taking back power in 1990. The generational conflicts, which have been widely established by researchers, gave way to a new divide between a “social wing” advocating a traditional policy and a “reforming wing” drawn towards post-materialist and “eco-socialist” values. By virtue of its immediacy, the German unification process (1989-1990) proved to be a litmus test, which allowed the efficiency of the SDP’s agenda and rhetoric to be evaluated. In spite of Rudolf Dreßler’s concrete propositions to improve the social union between East and West Germany, the SDP failed both to share its views on German unification and to impose its determination to overhaul the welfare state. Oskar Lafontaine’s reservations about the economic and social costs spiralling out of control contributed to a blurring of the lines on the SDP’s position on German unification.

<p>The thesis concentrates on Hofors and a local trade union environment between 1917 and 1946, where important parts of the trade union’s power were held by parties to the left of the social democrats. The overall aim is to problemize and discuss the issue of what characterised and made possible this deviation from the usual picture of a trade union movement dominated by social democracy. What characterised the conditions in such a local trade union environment and to what extent can local norms and political culture be linked to the conditions and the development in the trade union movement in Hofors?</p><p>The factors behind the radicalism in Hofors can be found in the local union and political context. The investigation points out the following main reasons: the left-wing local council of the Social Democratic Party and its successors’ organisational lead, the local labour council’s working method being close to what has been considered “social democratic”, their representatives being highly trusted in the local community, and the growth of a local radical tradition.</p><p>The political culture and the norms that gradually developed were based on a left-wing social democratic tradition. The local council of the Social Democratic Party that left the party in 1917 to join the left-wing social democratic faction was the same local council, despite their names and change of parties in the 1920s and 1930s. It became the local labour movement’s bearer of traditions and represented the continuity in the local trade union environment, which contributed to the leftwing socialist project being long-lived in Hofors. The central aspects were the trade union work and the practical-concrete tradition that developed.</p><p>Primarily through successful trade union work, the local labour council and its trade union representatives gained strong and long-term support from a large proportion of the local trade union movement’s members and the population of Hofors.</p><p>Against this background it may be stated that, even though it was often impossible for the parties to the left of social democracy to maintain a local trade union and political power position that was stronger than that of the social democrats for a lengthy period of time, it was not entirely impossible. It may also be stated that for the trade union member as such, a communist or socialist party affiliation was not a real obstacle in the election of shop stewards. Their focus was primarily put on the would-be representatives’ personal qualities and ability to live up to the demands and expectations placed on them by the members, and not so much on their ideological persuasion.</p>

Cette thèse porte sur les conceptions d’Egon Bahr dans le domaine de la politique à l’Est (Ostpolitik) de la République fédérale d’Allemagne (RFA) entre 1945 et 1975. L’analyse se concentre sur le lien entre l’Ostpolitik et l’idée que Bahr se fait de la place et du rôle de l’Allemagne en Europe. Plus précisément, cette étude veut cerner les buts poursuivis par Bahr dans le cadre de la politique orientale. La première partie traite du développement conceptuel de l’Ostpolitik (1945-1969), tandis que la seconde examine sa mise en application entre l’élection de Willy Brandt comme chancelier de la RFA et la conclusion des accords d’Helsinki (1969-1975). Les principales sources utilisées sont les écrits de Bahr ainsi que des documents inédits se trouvant dans divers centres d’archives non seulement en Allemagne, mais aussi aux États-Unis, en France et en Grande-Bretagne. Pour Bahr, l’Ostpolitik ne saurait se résumer à l’élimination des obstacles qui gênent la diplomatie ouest-allemande durant la guerre froide. Bahr poursuit plutôt un projet nationaliste ambitieux dans le contexte des relations avec le bloc soviétique : créer les conditions d’une redéfinition de la place de l’Allemagne en Europe. Pour lui, l’Ostpolitik constitue un instrument idéal pour faire de l’Allemagne la puissance prépondérante dans un nouvel ordre de paix européen. Trois éléments complémentaires participent à l’accomplissement de cette vision : 1) la consolidation de la paix et de la sécurité continentales; 2) la réunification allemande et 3) l’émancipation de la politique étrangère (ouest-)allemande. Cette thèse éclaire la pensée politique de Bahr et contribue à une meilleure compréhension de la signification de l’Ostpolitik dans le contexte plus large de la politique étrangère de la RFA. Les conceptions de Bahr sont uniques dans l’Allemagne de la guerre froide parce qu’elles sont centrées sur les notions de puissance, d’intérêt national et de « normalité ». En même temps, Bahr comprend que la coopération doit toujours rester l’instrument diplomatique privilégié des Allemands vu leur position géographique centrale. À travers le prisme des conceptions de son « architecte », l’Ostpolitik apparaît comme un véritable effort de réconciliation entre la paix en Europe et l’affirmation de l’influence allemande sur la scène internationale. / This thesis deals with Egon Bahr’s understanding of the Federal Republic of Germany’s (FRG) Eastern policy (Ostpolitik) between 1945 and 1975. The analysis is centered on the link between Ostpolitik and Bahr’s conception of Germany’s position and role in the European system. More precisely, this study aims at finding out which goals Bahr pursued in the context of Bonn’s Eastern policy. The first part of the thesis deals with the conceptual development of Ostpolitik (1945-1969). The second part takes a look at its implementation for the period between Willy Brandt’s election as West German Chancellor and the conclusion of the Helsinki Final Act (1969-1975). This thesis relies primarily on Bahr’s writings, including a vast number of unpublished sources, located mostly in German archives, but also in American, French and British archives. According to Bahr, Ostpolitik was not limited to the elimination of West Germany’s burdens in foreign policy during the Cold War. In fact, he pursued an ambitious, nationalistic project in the context of relations with the Soviet bloc. Bahr sought to create the necessary conditions for Germany to redefine its place in Europe. With Ostpolitik as his diplomatic instrument, his ultimate goal was to see Germany become the central power in a new European peace order. Three interrelated objectives formed the core of this vision: 1) the consolidation of peace and security on the continent; 2) German reunification and 3) the emancipation of (West) German foreign policy. This thesis sheds new light on Bahr’s political thought and contributes to a better understanding of Ostpolitik’s significance in the larger context of West German foreign policy. Bahr’s conceptions were unique in Cold War Germany because they were based on notions of power, the national interest and “normality”. At the same time, Bahr understood that Germans, because of their central geographic position, always had to rely on cooperation as the prime instrument of all their diplomatic initiatives. Through its “architect”, Ostpolitik appears as an effort at reconciliation between a peaceful Europe and the unhindered affirmation of German influence in world affairs.