| Abstract [eng] |
Influence of Norwegian Non-governmental Organizations on the State’s Foreign Policy This Master’s thesis deals with the analysis of the Norwegian NGOs and its influence on the state’s foreign policy. The main question focuses on the case of Norway and its Track II diplomacy in the international conflict cases. This thesis is also trying to answer the second (additional) question: what are the main factors that determine the success of Norwegian Track II diplomacy in international peace processes. Using the practice analysis method the main aim of this work is to find the right components of Norwegian model that helped to reach the compromise in Sudan, Sri Lanka, and Israel – Palestine cases. Track II diplomacy could be understood as cooperation of non-governmental, official and unofficial policy makers, sometimes private citizens or groups of individuals. The main condition is that these groups work together to reach the agreement in these countries where the official diplomacy failed. Track II diplomacy contrasts with track I diplomacy, which is official, governmental diplomacy that occur inside official government channels. In addition, the term track 1.5 diplomacy is used by some analysts to define a situation where official and non-official actors cooperate in conflict resolution. However, in this paper I decide to use the term of Track II diplomacy. After I did a research on Sudan, Sri Lanka, Israel – Palestine cases, I found conditions for successful small states' role in the international politics. States need to follow Norway's example, which has few rules. First of all, we need to understand that in some cases traditional conflict solving methods are not working. That’s why Norway and its NGO cooperation solving international conflicts are so unique. Second, one of the main keys to success is trust. NGOs based in the conflict country should trust NGOs from the third (neutral) country. Following country should not have intentions in the conflict region. Moreover, Norwegian NGOs could reach many different groups in the society. It helps to ensure human rights to many people during the conflict. In Israel – Palestine case this plays very important role. Also, it helps to ensure stability in the conflict areas. Norway case also showed that sometimes NGOs are more flexible than official institutions. All in all, Norway case shows that not only Track II diplomacy helps to solve conflicts that are continuing for decades. The research showed that traditional conflict solving elements are also important. Especially talking about the finances. Classical conflict solving is like background for Track II diplomacy. Thus, Norwegian model is a good example of how official diplomacy could be supplemented by Track II diplomacy. |
