DOCSLIB.ORG

The Origin, Development and Perspectives of Nordic Co-Operation in a New and Enlarged European Union Bonnén, Preben; Sosted, Michael

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Origin, Development and Perspectives of Nordic Co-Operation in a New and Enlarged European Union Bonnén, Preben; Sosted, Michael www.ssoar.info The origin, development and perspectives of nordic co-operation in a new and enlarged European Union Bonnén, Preben; Sosted, Michael Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Bonnén, P., & Sosted, M. (2003). The origin, development and perspectives of nordic co-operation in a new and enlarged European Union. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 32(1), 19-32. https://nbn-resolving.org/ urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-60128 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer CC BY-NC Lizenz (Namensnennung- This document is made available under a CC BY-NC Licence Nicht-kommerziell) zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu (Attribution-NonCommercial). For more Information see: den CC-Lizenzen finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/deed.de Preben Bonnén / Michael Søsted (Aarhus) The Origin, Development and Perspectives of Nordic Co-operation in a New and Enlarged European Union Die Voraussetzungen für eine Kooperation im Sicherheitsbereich sollten für die nordischen Länder in vielerlei Hinsicht besser sein als für ganz Europa. Es besteht dort ein Netzwerk für Kontakte und Kooperationen zwischen Regierungen, Bürokratien, nationalen Parlamenten, politischen Parteien, Handels- und Arbeitsorganisationen. Die Vereinigung „Norden“ bezieht sich auf Solidarität, gegen- seitiges Verständnis und grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit. Im Gegensatz zu anderen Formen zwischenstaatlicher Kooperation – wie SAS, Nordischer Rat, nordische Passunion, nordische Freihandelszone innerhalb der EFTA – haben es die nordischen Länder im Bereich der Sicherheits- und Verteidigungspolitik aber nicht zu einer ähnlich intensiven Zusammenarbeit gebracht. Das rührt auch daher, dass nordische Kooperation traditionellerweise innerhalb eines breiteren europäischen (und transatlantischen) Rahmens am besten funktioniert hat. Damit die nordischen Länder ihre Mög- lichkeiten innerhalb der EU besser nutzen, ist es nötig, dass sie eine entspanntere und realistischere Einstellung gegenüber der Entwicklung einer gemeinsamen europäischen Sicherheits- und Ver- teidigungspolitik entwickeln. Solange Dänemark, Schweden und Finnland jedoch ihre so genannte „kollektive“ nordische Zurückhaltung bezüglich Verteidigung beibehalten, wird es keine optimale Kooperation innerhalb der EU geben. 1. Introduction1 while Norway and Iceland have always been more oriented towards the west. Denmark, Swe- The word “Norden” is the customary term den and Finland have been more interested in used when referring to the five Nordic or Scandi- maintaining their boundaries on land, while navian countries of Northern Europe.2 Apart Norway held the Atlantic Sea as its primary area from the special situation of the Finnish-speak- of interest. ing population, language was a major unifying Norden has certain distinct features in respect factor between the Nordic peoples. Religion to issues of war and peace. The region has a (first Roman Catholic, since the 1520s Lutheran) long record of non-wars, i.e. opportunities in proved to be another unifying factor (Bonnén/ the area to wage war that have been avoided. Søsted 2002). Lesser known, but equally im- The Nordic region is what could be character- portant factors have been the shared understand- ised as a “pluralistic security community” with ing of moral values and the common set of le- stable expectations on peaceful settlement of gal principles (Wendt 1981, 11ff.). All in all, it conflicts. States within a pluralistic security is possible to speak of Norden as a group of community possess a certain compatibility of nations with a common heritage. On the other core values derived from common institutions, hand, Denmark, Sweden and Finland have tra- and mutual responsiveness to the point where ditionally found common ground and unity they entertain dependable expectations of peace- through the sharing of interests in the Baltic Sea ful change. Security communities arise out of a ÖZP, 32 (2003) 1 19 process of regional integration characterized by fully exploited the possibilities of Nordic co- the development of transaction flows, shared operation within the European Union. On the understandings and transnational values. These contrary, Nordic co-operation is hampered by transaction flows involve the regular, institution- continuous battles of prestige and short-sighted alised interaction not only of national govern- gains between individual Nordic countries. This ments but of members of civil society as well. situation is quite astonishing considering that In this view, interaction leads to dependable there will be no better time to develop Nordic exceptions of peaceful change, where states co-operation. However, changes in Nordic se- believe that disputes among members of the curity must be understood in the context of community will not be settled by force. Secu- broader changes in the political order in Europe. rity communities, however, are not defined A central feature of these changes is that the merely be the absence of war. They are also privileged status of the state is challenged. characterised by what is called a “we-feeling” However, given their common cultural herit- or shared identity.3 age and past experiences this lack of co-opera- The common heritage transformed into wide- tion seems puzzling and raises several impor- spread Nordic co-operation in the 19th century tant questions. Why has the potential for Nor- and reached its zenith during World War I. In dic co-operation not been fully exploited, and spite of very different experiences during World what barriers exist towards Nordic co-operation War II, Nordic co-operation continued well into within the European Union? Even if Nordic co- the Cold War. But the bipolar setting of the Cold operation does not function optimally, what War provided a rather rigid framework for the steps towards co-operation have been taken, and Nordic countries which curtailed any attempts how does Nordic co-operation within the Euro- to further Nordic co-operation – especially in pean Union function today? What approach the area of security. Despite their shared values from Nordic countries can we expect in the fu- and feelings of solidarity, Nordic countries have ture? Is there going to be an extension of co- found it difficult to co-operate intensely in the operation or have we seen the best of it because field of security and defence policy. Whereas Norden has played its role? These are the main Norden appears as one unit linguistically and questions this article will address. On the fol- ethnically, the region is divided when it comes lowing pages, we will analyse the historical to security and defence issues. A telling exam- background with special focus on Nordic co- ple of this is the failure of the plans and nego- operation during the World Wars and the Cold tiations in 1948 to establish a Nordic Defence War in order to establish a framework for dis- Community. The project’s goal of a common cussing Norden in the post-Cold War system and Nordic defence arrangement proved too ambi- Nordic co-operation in the new European set- tious and, in retrospect, quite unrealistic. Soon ting. This article argues that Norden as a (sub-) after, the Cold War cast its paralysing effect on region still has a role to play and can arguably the Nordic and European security architecture, become a model when it comes to stabilizing thus making any inter-Nordic security and de- and extending informal regional co-operation. fence co-operation virtually impossible for dec- Before addressing these and other questions, it ades to come. is critical to first examine the historical back- With the end of the Cold War, the rigid bipo- ground and how it relates to the current situa- lar framework gradually dissolved and the ex- tion in and among the Nordic countries. pectations of enhanced Nordic co-operation re- surfaced. Room for manoeuvre greatly increased and many anticipated an unprecedented degree 2. The common Nordic heritage of Nordic co-operation. Indeed, co-operation did increase in several aspects, but Nordic co-op- In spite of close links of culture and kinship, eration failed to reach expectations in the one the centuries immediately after the Viking pe- area most envisaged. The Norden has not (yet) riod witnessed the emergence of three states, 20 which soon began to compete for influence position in Norden. The result was the Scandi- within the Nordic region. The three states were navian War 1675–1679 that ended indecisively, Denmark, which at that time also included the and equally little was achieved when Denmark- southern region of present Sweden (Skåne, Norway in 1709 entered into an alliance with Halland and Blekinge); Norway, including ar- Russia, Poland and Prussia, Sweden’s neigh- eas which later became parts of Sweden, as well bouring rivals. When peace finally came in as the Faeroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland; 1721, the kingdom of Sweden-Finland lost a and finally, Sweden together with Finland. For good portion of its territories, but surprisingly centuries, the frontiers of these three states were Denmark-Norway had not regained any of its fluid and serious conflicts between them were previously lost lands. Subsequently, Denmark surprisingly minimal despite numerous minor never again regained to the same extent its in- wars. In 1380, Denmark and Norway – includ- fluence within the Nordic region. ing the Faeroe Islands,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence Policy
    bailes_hb.qxd 21/3/06 2:14 pm Page 1 Alyson J. K. Bailes (United Kingdom) is A special feature of Europe’s Nordic region the Director of SIPRI. She has served in the is that only one of its states has joined both British Diplomatic Service, most recently as the European Union and NATO. Nordic British Ambassador to Finland. She spent countries also share a certain distrust of several periods on detachment outside the B Recent and forthcoming SIPRI books from Oxford University Press A approaches to security that rely too much service, including two academic sabbaticals, A N on force or that may disrupt the logic and I a two-year period with the British Ministry of D SIPRI Yearbook 2005: L liberties of civil society. Impacting on this Defence, and assignments to the European E Armaments, Disarmament and International Security S environment, the EU’s decision in 1999 to S Union and the Western European Union. U THE NORDIC develop its own military capacities for crisis , She has published extensively in international N Budgeting for the Military Sector in Africa: H management—taken together with other journals on politico-military affairs, European D The Processes and Mechanisms of Control E integration and Central European affairs as E ongoing shifts in Western security agendas Edited by Wuyi Omitoogun and Eboe Hutchful R L and in USA–Europe relations—has created well as on Chinese foreign policy. Her most O I COUNTRIES AND U complex challenges for Nordic policy recent SIPRI publication is The European Europe and Iran: Perspectives on Non-proliferation L S Security Strategy: An Evolutionary History, Edited by Shannon N.
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic Policy &
    Arctic Policy & Law References to Selected Documents Edited by Wolfgang E. Burhenne Prepared by Jennifer Kelleher and Aaron Laur Published by the International Council of Environmental Law – toward sustainable development – (ICEL) for the Arctic Task Force of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law (IUCN-CEL) Arctic Policy & Law References to Selected Documents Edited by Wolfgang E. Burhenne Prepared by Jennifer Kelleher and Aaron Laur Published by The International Council of Environmental Law – toward sustainable development – (ICEL) for the Arctic Task Force of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of ICEL or the Arctic Task Force of the IUCN Commission on Environmental Law concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers and boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of ICEL or the Arctic Task Force. The preparation of Arctic Policy & Law: References to Selected Documents was a project of ICEL with the support of the Elizabeth Haub Foundations (Germany, USA, Canada). Published by: International Council of Environmental Law (ICEL), Bonn, Germany Copyright: © 2011 International Council of Environmental Law (ICEL) Reproduction of this publication for educational or other non- commercial purposes is authorized without prior permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. Citation: International Council of Environmental Law (ICEL) (2011).
    [Show full text]
  • European Autonomy and Diversity Papers
    European Diversity and Autonomy Papers EDAP 03/2014 Making Autonomies Matter: Sub-State Actor Accommodation in the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers An Analysis of the Institutional Framework for Accommodating the Faroe Islands, Greenland and Åland within ‘Norden’ Sarah Stephan Managing editors: Emma Lantschner / Francesco Palermo / Gabriel N. Toggenburg Editorial Board (In alphabetical order): Bieber, Florian (Universität Graz, A) Burgess, Micheal (University of Kent, UK) Castellino, Joshua (Middlesex University, UK) Craufurd Smith, Rachel (University of Edinburgh, UK) Dani, Marco (Università di Trento, I) De Witte, Bruno (European University Institute, I) Gamper, Anna (Universität Innsbruck, A) Henrard, Kristin (Erasmus University of Rotterdam, NL) Hoffmeister Frank (Free University of Brussels, BE) Keating, Michael (University of Aberdeen, UK) Kujovich, Gil (Vermont Law School, US) Kymlicka, Will (Queens University, CAN) Marko, Joseph (Universität Graz, A) Medda-Windischer, Roberta (EURAC, I) Nic Shuibhne, Niamh (University of Edinburgh, UK) Oeter, Stefan (Universität Hamburg, D) Packer, John (United Nations Department of Political Affairs, University of Essex, UK) Pallaver, Günther (Universität Innsbruck, A) Poggeschi, Giovanni (Università di Lecce, I) Ruiz, Eduard (Universidad de Deusto, ES) Sasse, Gwendolyn (Oxford University, UK) Tarr, G. Alan (Rutgers University, US) Teachout, Peter (Vermont Law School, US) Toniatti, Roberto (Università di Trento, I) Triandafyllidou, Anna (European University Institute, I) Williams,
    [Show full text]
  • The Nordic Council – Our Council the Nordic Council – Our Council © Nordic Council, 2012 ISBN 978-92-893-2372-7 DOI ANP 2012:737
    The Nordic Council – our council The Nordic Council – our council © Nordic Council, 2012 ISBN 978-92-893-2372-7 DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.6027/ANP2012-737 ANP 2012:737 Editors: Silje Bergum Kinsten and Heidi Orava Design: Jette Koefoed Photos: Karin Beate Nøsterud; Ingram; Image Select; Ojo; Søren Sigfusson; Ludwig Ehlers/Landesarchiv Berlin; Photos from “50 år Nordisk Råd 1952–2002” Copies: 1500 Print: Rosendahls-Schultz Grafisk, Albertslund Printed in Denmark Nordic co-operation Nordic co-operation is one of the world’s most extensive forms of regional collaboration, involving Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, and the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Åland. Nordic co-operation has firm traditions in politics, the economy, and culture. It plays an important role in European and international collabora- tion, and aims at creating a strong Nordic community in a strong Europe. Nordic co-operation seeks to safeguard Nordic and regional interests and principles in the global community. Common Nordic values help the region solidify its position as one of the world’s most innovative and competitive. Nordic Council Ved Stranden 18 DK-1061 Copenhagen K Telefon (+45) 3396 0200 www.norden.org The Nordic Council – our council Council Nordic The This brochure will provide you with a deeper insight into what the Nordic Council is all about. You will discover that the work of the Council exerts an influence on your life. Perhaps you would like to help exert influence on the Council. 4 The Nordic Council – our council Introduction 7 Out of the ashes 8 The first steps 10 Timeline 10 What issues does the Nordic Council address? 14 Closer to the people 17 Facts about the Nordic Council 22 It is also important that the people of the Region continue to consider the Council relevant to their lives.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nordic Countries and the European Security and Defence
    Introduction The European defence challenge for the Nordic region Alyson J. K. Bailes I. The role of this introduction The European Defence and Security Policy (ESDP), launched by the European Union (EU) in its historic decisions at Helsinki in December 1999,1 remains the subject of widely varying judgements, views and aspirations throughout Europe and, indeed, among many of Europe’s partners. Its initial ambition was modest: to provide an alternative means of carrying out a specific range of military crisis management tasks under the EU’s own command. Nonetheless, it has evoked fears, ranging from the risk that it could undermine the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to that of an inevitable slide towards an integrated ‘European army’. Conversely, and although the EU member states have tried to goad each other into better defence performance with the help of ESDP targets, the continued shrinkage of most EU defence budgets exposes the seemingly unbridgeable gap between European ambition and performance. The question of the ESDP’s finalité—where the policy is actually supposed to be leading, ranging along interlinked spectrums from occasional military cooperation to complete guaranteed defence and from pure intergovernmentalism to collective European control of military assets—produces the most widely varying answers, and feelings, of all.2 The ESDP is thus a challenge for all European states; but the story of how the five Nordic countries, singly and collectively, have participated in and adapted to it since its birth (and gestation period) is the particular subject of the chapters in parts I–IV of this volume. This introduction aims both to provide the starting point for appreciating the subsequent material and to anticipate an issue to which some of the closing contributions return.
    [Show full text]
  • Finnish Security and European Security Policy
    FINNISH SECURITY AND EUROPEAN SECURITY POLICY Stephen J. Blank September 27, 1996 ******* The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. The author wishes to express his gratitude to the Institute for National Security Studies of the U.S. Air Force Academy which supported the research and interviews cited here. ******* Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to: Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, PA 17013-5244. Copies of this report may be obtained from the Publications and Production Office by calling commercial (717) 245-4133, DSN 242-4133, FAX (717) 245-3820, or via the Internet at rummelr@carlisle- emh2.army.mil. ******* All 1995 and later Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) monographs are available on the Strategic Studies Institute Homepage for electronic dissemination. SSI's Homepage address is: http://carlisle-www.army. mil/usassi/ ii FOREWORD In 1995 Finland joined the European Union (EU). This action culminated several years of a fundamental reorientation of Finnish security policy as Finland moved from the neutrality imposed on it by the Soviet Union to a policy with a priority on European integration through the European Union. Finland, in joining the EU, has retained its independent defense and security posture, even as it seeks to strengthen its standing abroad and gain added leverage, through the EU, for dealing with Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of the Nordic Councils
    The Case of the Nordic Councils MAPPING MULTILATERALISM IN TRANSITION NO. 1 TOBIAS ETZOLD DECEMBER 2013 The global architecture of multilat - Nordic multilateral cooperation represents one of the oldest and most eral diplomacy is in transition and a traditional forms of regional cooperation in Europe. It comprises the five comprehensive understanding of Nordic countries (often referred to as “Norden”)—Denmark, Finland, the new dynamics, players, and Iceland, Norway, and Sweden as well as their autonomous regions, the Faroe capacities is needed. The Mapping Islands (Denmark), Greenland (Denmark), and the Åland Islands (Finland). Nordic cooperation has deep roots in history, but started to become more Multilateralism in Transition series institutionalized and formalized only after the end of the Second World War. features short briefing papers on Nordic cooperation builds primarily on consultation and coordination established but evolving regional without affecting the countries’ sovereignty. 1 Four factors were decisive for the organizations and select cross- emerging Nordic multilateral structures after World War II: first, the regional organizations. The papers countries share common historical and cultural traditions, and their closely aim to: (1) identify the key role and related languages enable transnational contacts on all societal levels; second, features of the organizations; (2) the division of labor within their joint institutions bears several advantages; third, the unequal power dynamics of several Nordic countries bordering assess their current dynamics; and major European military, economic, and cultural powers led to the solidifica - (3) analyze their significance for the tion of a Nordic identity and a strengthening of Nordic cooperation; and overall regional and global geopolit - finally, mutual support for a Nordic commitment to act independently in ical context.
    [Show full text]
  • Nordic Political and Economic Cooperation: Context, History and Outlook
    ASEAN ENERGY MARKET INTEGRATION (AEMI) Energy Security and Connectivity: The Nordic and European Union Approaches ____________________________________________________________________ FORUM PAPER Nordic Political and Economic Cooperation: Context, History and Outlook February 2016 Johan Strang Centre for Nordic Studies, University of Helsinki [email protected] Executive Summary The Nordic countries have been brought together by the simple geopolitical fact that they are small countries with mighty neighbours. Cooperation has been necessary in order to compete with larger countries and to increase their influence in international arenas. At the same time, all grand schemes for political unification of the region have failed. Instead, the Nordic countries have succeeded in developing a piecemeal approach to regional integration, focusing on people-to-people interaction and mobility, cultural cooperation and research networks. This peculiar form of “cob-web integration” has fostered a regional identity (nordism) that forms an integral part of the five national identities. As a result, despite being divided in terms of NATO and EU membership, the Nordic countries form a family of nations united in a fundamental trust in one another. This has, in turn made innovative and ambitious transnational experiments such as Nord Pool possible. However, stressing the importance of informal people-to-people cooperation, it also needs to be emphasised that Nordic cooperation benefits considerably from the fact that it takes place within the larger treaty-based European framework of the EU and the European Economic Area. Arguably, it is this mix of top-down integration and bottom-up cooperation that has made the Nordic region one of the most unified regions in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nordic Council and the EU
    Together or apart? The Nordic Council and the EU Karina Jutila l Terhi Tikkala (eds.) report 1 • 2009 Petri Artturi Asikainen/Gorilla Contents Introduction ......................... 3 Earlier reforms in the Nordic Council .......... 9 Reforms between 1989 and 2008 .............10 1990s...........................10 Winds.of.change.....................12 Current.developments..................13 The effect of the reforms ..................14 Is.small.beautiful?....................14 Far-reaching.enough?...................14 Are.further.reforms.necessary?..............15 Previous.reform.measures.efficient?...........16 Reforms vis-à-vis Europe and the EU............17 Summary and conclusions .................19 How is the Nordic Council doing? ........... 22 Background and values unite member countries .... 23 Lack of political clout a weakness ............ 24 A more active approach to EU issues ........... 25 More efficiency and results ............... 27 The NC in the future: a talking shop or an invigorated actor at the EU level? ......... 29 Annex: Questionnaire form .................31 Contents 1 The Nordic Council and the EU ............. 33 An institution on the wane or on the up? ......... 33 Unprejudiced.evaluation.of.the.future.needed.....35 The EU needs regional parliaments ........... 36 Similar.but.different.parliaments............36 .The.challenges.of.regionalisation.in.the.EU.......38 A parliamentary EU? ................... 40 NC needs to be reformed and made more European .. 43 What.sort.of.EU.agenda.does.the.NC.need?.......45
    [Show full text]
  • A Stronger North? Nordic Cooperation in Foreign and Security Policy in a New Security Environment
    Tuomas Iso-Markku, Eeva Innola, Teija Tiilikainen A Stronger North? Nordic cooperation in foreign and security policy in a new security environment May 2018 Publication series of the Government’s analysis, assessment and research activities 37/2018 DESCRIPTION Publisher and release date Prime Minister´s Office, 8.5.2018 Authors Tuomas Iso-Markku, Eeva Innola, Teija Tiilikainen Title of publication A stronger North? Nordic cooperation in foreign and security policy in a new security environment Name of series and number Publications of the Government´s analysis, assessment and research of publication activities 37/2018 Keywords Nordic cooperation, foreign policy, security policy, defence policy, defence cooperation, NORDEFCO Other parts of publication/ - other produced versions Release date May, 2018 Pages 58 Language English Abstract Nordic cooperation on foreign and security policy has gained renewed attention in recent years. Changes in the Nordic states’ immediate security environment after the Ukraine crisis, as well as growing global uncertainty, have turned foreign, security and defence policy into a focal point of the Nordic agenda. Nordic foreign and security policy cooperation is characterized by informality, as it takes place outside of the institutional Nordic structures. This report assesses the current state of this cooperation by opening up structures and formats within which the informal cooperation takes place. The report then discusses future prospects for, as well as constraints on, deepening the cooperation from different angles, including agenda formation, institutional complexities, Nordic cooperation in multilateral contexts and bilateral Nordic relations. Defence cooperation forms a separate sub-field of Nordic cooperation, as it has its own unique structures and practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from Brill.Com10/01/2021 03:59:29PM Via Free Access 94 • SIRPA SOINI
    The Nordic Committee on Bioethics By Sirpa Soini, University ofHelsinki l 1 Introduction The Nordic Committee on Bioethics (subsequently referred to as the Bioethics Committee)2, as we know it today, was established in 1996. Its roots, however, are in the Nordic Collaboration Programme for Biotechnology 1988-92 when an inde- pendent Nordic Committee for Ethics related to Biotechnology (Nordisk utvalgfor etikk innen bioteknologi) was created. The birth of such a committee was a characteristic of the time at the beginning of 1990S. Both the national and world communities were confronted with rapid- ly emerging new biotechnological inventions and applications, e.g. gene patenting, cloning, a variety of novel in vitro fertilisation techniques and applications, geneti- cally-modified organisms, and the human genome project, just to name a few. These developments raised fears in the public and the research community as regards how to ensure the appropriate use of novel techniques and assess their potential threat to humanity. In order to respond to new needs to monitor and discuss bioethical issues, the Council of Europe set up an ad hoc Committee of experts on Bioethics (CAHBI) in 1985, which later became the Steering Committee on Bioethics (CDBI) in 1992. UNESCO, for its part, established the International Bioethics Committee (IBC) in 1993. Both the CDBI and the IBC are also highly influential today and contribute towards policy-making. Sweden and Denmark were among the first countries in Europe to found national ethical councils; Sweden founded the National Coun- cil on Medical Ethics (SMER - Statens Medicinsk-Etiska Rad) in 1985 and Denmark founded the Danish Council of Ethics (Det etiske rad) in 1987, just few years after France had established its National Consultative Ethics Committee ( CCNE - Comite ConsultatifNational d'Ethique) in 1983.
    [Show full text]
  • Cfp Workshop 14.10.2021 Religious Freedom Helsinki.Pdf
    Call for papers (Deadline June 30, 2021) Advocating religious freedom in the Helsinki process New research perspectives on the non-state actors in view of the 50th anniversary of the Helsinki treaty (1975–2025) Online Workshop, Thu 14 October 2021, p.m. The Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) born of the Helsinki Agreements (1973-75) is often described as one of the main diplomatic achievements of the détente era, and a crucial milestone towards ending the Cold War. Yet not only diplomats played a part in the process. Non-state actors and NGOs also did their share by lobbying CSCE staff and conference attendees for human rights and Religious freedom violations behind the Iron Curtain. Drawing on the most recent research on this topic (Badalassi and Snyder, The CSCE and the End of the Cold War: Diplomacy, Societies and Human Rights, 2019), this online workshop aims at further exploring human rights activists involved in the Helsinki process, at the interface between the Dissent and the Western public, and between state and other private networks. The focus of this workshop is on the religion, on religious networks and actors who advocate religious freedom and human rights in the CSCE process. We are looking for new research contributions that deal with the following topics in the context of the Helsinki Process: —Presentation of new primary sources and archives —Religious networks in support of the CSCE, Helsinki monitoring groups —Religious actors and their perspectives (first-hand testimonies and retrospect assessments) —Religious freedom and anti-communism Politically and geographically, we are particularly interested in contributions focussing on the neutral States of Europe (e.g.
    [Show full text]