Henrik Gutzon Larsen

The EU: A Global Military Actor?

The point of departure in this article is the question of why the EUs policy focus can be said to be regional rather than global in spite of having access to considerable capabilities and instruments in its foreign policy and why the EU has made such little use of the (modest) military means at its disposal so far. The approach used is a constructivist approach drawing on discourse analysis of primarily EU Council documents and the speeches of the High Representative Solana. Successful enlargement and a successful EU role in the former Yugoslavia are presented as the keys to a truly future global role. Moreover, it is shown that the dominant discourse in the EU in the 1990s constructed the EU as a civilian power drawing on political and economic means, which has to a large extent also been the case after the St. Malo Process. In other words, dominant framework of meaning at the EU level provides a possible answer to the EUs regional policy focus and its limited use of military means.

The EU as a Normative Power and the Research on External Perceptions: The Missing Link*

In research on European foreign policy two important axes of debate have been running relatively independently of each other for more than a decade: the study of the European Union as a normative power (NPE) and the study of external perceptions of the EU. However, the studies of external perception offer some findings that are central for the NPE debate. This articles argument is that the external perceptions literature points to a limited (if still identifiable) perception of the EU as a normative power depending on the geographical area. By comparison, the image of a powerful economic actor is prevalent. The article raises the question of whether the thin and geographically varied character of the perceptions relating to the EU as a normative power justifies the general designation of NPE. A new agenda focusing on geographical differences and interaction with other sources of power is outlined.

Danish CFSP Policy in the Post-Cold War Period Continuity or Change?

The article examines the issue of whether Danish policy towards the CFSP is in line with the active internationalism that has characterized Danish foreign policy in general in the 1990s. It shows that Danish policy with regard to the CFSP has changed in the post-Cold War period. Denmark has begun to support the construction of the EU as an external political actor. This policy line can be explained by the dominance of a discourse within the Danish political system that views the EU as a central political actor with a role in the field of security. The dominance of this view has meant that the Edinburgh Decision agreement was not a watershed in Danish CFSP policy, although it has prevented Denmark from being part of the political inner circle. Against this background, Denmark has promoted its key foreign policy issues actively in the CFSP, also post 1992.

COMMODIFYING DANISH HOUSING COMMONS

Abstract Housing was a backbone of the Danish welfare state, but this has been profoundly challenged by the past decades of neoliberal housing politics. In this article we outline the rise of the Danish model of association‐based housing on the edge of the market economy (and the state). From this, we demonstrate how homes in private cooperatives through political interventions in the context of a booming real estate market have plunged into the market economy and been transformed into private commodities in all but name, and we investigate how non‐profit housing associations frontally and stealthily are attacked through neoliberal reforms. This carries the seeds for socio‐spatial polarization and may eventually open the gate for commodification – and thus the dismantling of the little that is left of a socially just housing sector. Yet, while the association‐based model was an accessary to the commodification of cooperative housing, it can possibly be an accomplice in sustaining non‐profit housing as a housing commons.

Normative Power Europe and the importance of discursive context: The European Union and the politics of religion

This article attempts to demonstrate the importance of the discursive context for whether and, if so, how the European Union (EU) can exert normative power in different policy areas. Surprisingly, the concept of power has not been extensively discussed in the academic literature on Normative Power Europe, with the notable exceptions of Diez (2013); Keene (2012); Forsberg (2011) and Huelss (2011) (who also discuss the meaning of the ‘normative’). Focusing on power, the question asked in this article is how the discursive context of the politics of religion affects the EU’s ability to exert normative power in this area. The article examines the politics of religion by looking at the case of the debate about human rights versus religion in the United Nations Human Rights Council after the year 2000. The broader point addressed in the article is whether the EU can exert normative power regardless of the discursive context of the policy area concerned.

A Distinct FPA for Europe? Towards a Comprehensive Framework for Analysing the Foreign Policy of EU Member States:

In the existing literature, the need for a distinctive approach to the analysis of foreign policy in Europe is usually seen as a uniform requirement applying across policy areas. At the same time, the criteria for judging the need for a new approach are underspecified. The article puts forward the argument that the approach to analysis of the national foreign policies of EU member states ought to vary according to the policy area under study. On the basis of an empirical study of Danish foreign policy, the article presents a comprehensive framework for the analysis of national foreign policy in an EU context which takes account of differing issue areas. The framework includes three analytical lenses: traditional FPA, transformed FPA and postmodern FPA. These lenses are derived from the strength of the EU policy and the national understandings of agency in the area concerned.

The Fight against Terrorism

‘Terrorism’ is a very politically loaded term. What is understood as an act of terrorism by some is understood as an act of legitimate resistance by others. The chapter will not attempt to put forward a definition of the fight against terrorism in absolute theoretical terms, but rather in more concrete political terms. Measures against terrorism are understood as official measures taken against groups such as the IRA and ETA, but the focus will be on the measures taken against Al Qaeda and similar networks, in particular after 11 September 2001. Since key political actors link this fight to issues such as the spread of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), crime and failed states, such issues will also be touched upon without passing a judgement on whether they should rightly be part of a ‘war against terrorism’. In a broader sense, then, the chapter deals with the policies towards the new international security agenda, post-11 September.1 Although policies against terrorist groups are not new, the much stronger emphasis on this area post-11 September in terms of a general security threat means that this is very much a policy field in the making. At the same time, more than most of the other areas in this book, it cuts across policy areas and touches on several different policy dimensions.

Discourses of state identity and post-Lisbon national foreign policy: The case of Denmark

The political system of the EU and its member states is frequently seen as post-Westphalian within constructivist-inspired research. This is based on the view that political authority and legitimacy are to be found both at the EU level and the national level with no clear borders between them. The question raised in this article is how the member states conceive of themselves as foreign policy actors in this situation where they are both politically embedded in EU foreign policy structures and, in most cases, formally able to act outside the EU structures in the field of foreign policy. The overall argument is that a pertinent answer to this question can be provided by looking at how (or whether) state identity is articulated in relation to the EU. The paper first presents theoretical considerations relating to discursive articulations of state identity in an EU context. The relevance of these discursive articulations is then illustrated through the empirical example of Danish articulations of actorness prior to and post Lisbon. It is shown that the articulation of national actorness in relation to the EU varied across the different areas of foreign policy before and after Lisbon. A research agenda that flows from these considerations is outlined.

Development and Aid

We now look at the area of development and aid. The focus here is the EU’s aid — that is, the aid given by the Community and not the individual member states.1 The aid of the Community places it as the fifth highest donor on a global scale. In absolute figures, the total aid from the Community in 2000 was just above 5 billion euro, that is about three times as much as Danish development aid (OECD, 2002).

An alternative for whom? The evolution and socio-economy of Danish cohousing

Cohousing has caught the attention of activists, academics and decision-makers, and Danish experiences with cohousing as bofællesskaber are routinely highlighted as pioneering and successful. This article presents a mainly quantitative analysis of the development of Danish intergenerational cohousing and investigates socio-economic characteristics of residents in these communities. First, the article demonstrates how the development of Danish cohousing has been undergirded by distinct shifts in dominant tenure forms. Second, it shows that inhabitants in contemporary Danish cohousing are socio-economically distinct. This does not diminish the value of cohousing, but it problematises assumptions about the social sustainability of this housing form.