Browsing by study line "Studieinriktning i samhällsvetenskaper"

The purpose of this thesis is to analyse The European Parliament (EP) as an actor of parliamentary diplomacy during its ninth parliamentary term, in the context of its relations with China. The relations between the EU and China have felt a major shift from the late 2010s onwards, and the EP has been increasingly vocal about Chinese human rights matters through its various resolutions and declarations. This thesis pursues to analyse the public outputs of the European Parliament through two research questions: How does the European Parliament operate as an actor of parliamentary diplomacy? and how is the European Parliament’s China policy characterized in its resolutions? while also comparing the EP’s public outputs to that of the EEAS’ through the question of How do the public outputs of the European Parliament compare to that of the EEAS’? This thesis relies heavily on the definition of parliamentary diplomacy and sees the European Parliament as an increasingly important actor in the multilayered and evolving international field. This thesis consists of focusing on the overview of foreign political conduct in the EU, the definition of parliamentary diplomacy, focusing on the European Parliament as an actor of parliamentary diplomacy along a case study. The case study of this thesis is an analysis of the EP’s resolutions, other publications & delegation work, and EEAS publications, divided into three subchapters. The methods used consist of coding along with qualitative and quantitative content analysis. The findings are, that the EP pursues to be a particularly vocal foreign political actor when it comes to China. The publications of China are increasingly negative by their nature, and in a way, it seems that the EP has abandoned the central idea of parliamentary diplomacy of conducting mutual relations, in favour of protecting its normative ideals. As part of its public outputs on China, the EP has also put much emphasis on the need for the EEAS to act in a particular way to tackle some of the China-related issues. The conclusion is, that the EEAS’ China policy does not seem to differ much from that of the EP, the clear exception seemingly being the case of Taiwan relations.

In my thesis, I study the evolving role of the European Union in facilitating the Belgrade-Pristina Dialogue. Since 2011, the EU has acted as a facilitator in the dialogue that aims to normalize the relations between Kosovo and Serbia. I focus especially on the development of the EU’s negotiating approach in the dialogue. In my thesis, I present three research questions: 1) What kind of a negotiating approach does the EU adopt in mediating the dialogue? 2) How does the EU incentivize Kosovo’s and Serbia’s participation in the dialogue? 3) How actively does the EU engage in the facilitation of dialogue? The theoretical framework of my thesis is twofold. Regarding the EU’s negotiating approach and engagement in the dialogue, I follow the categorization presented in Zartman and Touval’s (1985) mediation theory, where mediators working in conflict resolution are divided into communicators, formulators, and manipulators. Concerning the incentives offered by the EU, I rely on Schimmelfennig ja Sedelmeier’s (2004) classification within Europeanization theory, where Europeanization is presented as following from external incentives or social learning. As my research data, I use the European Commission’s yearly reports on Kosovo and Serbia, as well as the EU’s General Affairs Council conclusions on the Enlargement and Stabilisation and Association Process, which describe the dialogue’s progression and the EU’s positions on the dialogue. I analyze the data through the use of Qualitative Content Analysis by assigning coding categories to the documents, which enable me to examine the EU’s mood in various phases of the dialogue, the development of the input the EU exerts on the dialogue, and the use of incentives the EU offers Kosovo and Serbia. As the result of my thesis, I show that the dialogue can be divided into a progress phase (2011-2016) and a stagnation phase (2017-2022). I find that in the progress phase, the EU acts as a neutral arbiter, but as the dialogue progresses into the stagnation phase, the EU attempts to create progress by increasing its engagement in the dialogue and by strengthening the incentives it uses, introducing sticks in addition to carrots. This transforms the EU’s mediator role in the dialogue from an arbiter to a mediation participant protecting its own interests.

This master's thesis compares two quite different areas of Nordic cooperation, the passport union and defence cooperation. The research question seeks to find answers to whether the failures of the passport union have been connected to the advantages in defence policy and if they have not, which factor have promoted the shift of attention form passport union to defence cooperation. I seek to demonstrate how the atmosphere in cooperation has changes and the time of growing cooperation and supranationalism is turning to a traditional realist, intergovernmental cooperation. The first form of cooperation, the passport union, at the time of its founding in the 1950s was distinctively deep form of cooperation, especially considering being a traditionally sensitive political area.. The importance of defence cooperation, on the other hand, has increased especially in the 2010s and thereafter due to the changes in the European security environment. The most important events are the Russian conquest of the Crimean peninsula and later the war in Ukraine, as well as Finland's and Sweden's NATO application in 2022. Both areas, defence, and the passport union, include a lot of other international cooperation, the most important of which is the Schengen area in connection to the passport union and NATO in defence cooperation. By comparing these two areas, we see the many forms of Nordic cooperation and changes in the most important themes over the decades. With the definition of the borders, the quality of the passport union becomes evident. Borders are diverse, can create inequality and equality, unite and separate people, and act as the physical borders of the state, representing states’ power and rights. With the diversity of borders, their opening has been a significant step in Nordic cooperation. Even though the passport union has faced challenges, it is still in operation and plays a significant role as a builder and facilitator of Nordic cooperation. Defence cooperation, on the other hand, has largely developed under international organizations. The most important of these is NATO, whose founding members Denmark, Norway and Iceland were, and to which Finland and Sweden submitted their application to join in 2022. Cooperation under the European Union as well as commitment to UN and NATO exercises and peacekeeping have also developed Nordic cooperation in defence forces. NORDEFCO, founded in 2009, is important achievement as a facilitator of Nordic cooperation outside other institutions. By using the reports and texts of the Foreign Policy Institute and its Nordic counterparts, we get a picture of the effects of crises to these chosen policy areas. These crises are most prominently the 2015 refugee crisis, the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic and Russia's attack on Ukraine. The historical analysis is based on academic literature as well as political statements, opinion polls and news articles. When comparing these two areas of cooperation, it is clear that global events have affected the level of cooperation, and cooperation often sparks as a reaction to external events. Because of this, defence cooperation has been more significant and received more attention in the recent years. The passport union is still a significant part of cooperation, but it seems that its peak has already passed, and other things are attracting more attention. At the same time, international cooperation around the world is experiencing similar changes. The conclusion is that whereas it is true that the passport union has struggled while the defence has bloomed, the changing focus has been due to global events. However, while the hypothesis was that similar events were failures for one and successes for the other, the most important events shaping cooperation have been different.

Various approaches have been applied to explore the populist discourse by Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian Prime Minister. Although many studies define populism as a discourse that pits ‘the people’ against ‘the elite’, they fail to explain how these categories come into being. As a result, they cannot clarify how Orbán has been able to reshape his populist messages consistently and preserve political power. 
To address this gap in the current scholarship, I have analysed how Orbán constructed his populism between March 15, 2010, and March 15, 2018, using his selected National Day Speeches. My inquiry has been informed by Ernesto Laclau’s theory of populism, which focuses on how various components are articulated within political discourse. Additionally, I have drawn on Marina Vulović and Emilia Palonen’s interpretation of Laclau’s perspective, which provides a unique formula for applying Laclau’s theoretical framework. My thesis investigates the populism in Orbán’s National Day speeches by utilising post-foundational discourse analysis and the Laclaudian formula of Vulović and Palonen. Specifically, it centres on the political themes he refers to in his speeches and how his populism is demonstrated based on these themes.
My analysis reveals how Orbán constructed the identity of the Hungarian people by leveraging antagonism against adversaries and employing emotional engagement in the process. My findings contribute to the literature on Orbán’s populism by illustrating the effectiveness of investigating his discourse through Laclau’s outlook.