NATO and Denmark
| DOI | 10.1177/001083676800300105 |
| Date | 01 March 1968 |
| Published date | 01 March 1968 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
NATO
and
Denmark
Erling
Bjøl
I
The
provision
of
the
North
Atlantic
Treaty
allowing
a
member
to
leave
the
Alliance
with
one
year’s
notice
after
1969
has
been
a
standing
issue
for
some
years
in
the
po-
litical
debate
in
Denmark.
The
debate
has
flared
up
especially
at
election
times -
which
have
been
quite
frequent
in
recent
years.
The
parliamentary
elections
in
the
autumn
of
1966
were
succeeded
by
new
elections
in
little
over
a
year,
in
January
1968.
Two
small
left-wing
parties,
the
Popular
Socialists
and
the
Left
Socialists,
demand
Danish
withdrawal
from
the
Atlantic
Alli-
ance
after
1969.
The
Radical
Party
is
scep-
tical
of
continued
membership,
and
sug-
gests
a
thorough
investigation
of
the
whole
security
policy
in
view
of
the
possibility
of
a
new
orientation
after
1969.
At
the
January
elections
this
year
the
Radical
Party
had
its
largest
electoral
success
since
1913,
and
the
new
non-socialist
Goverment
was
formed
by
a
Radical
prime
minister,
Hilmar
Bauns-
gaard.
It
is,
however,
a
coalition
govern-
ment
in
which
the
two
other
participating
parties
are
Venstre
(the
liberal
party)
and
the
Conservatives,
both
of
which
are
clearly
in
favour
of
a
continuation
of
the
NATO
membership,
unless
or
until
the
situation
in
Europe
changes
radically.
This
is
also
the
position
of
the
Social
Democratic
party,
now
in
opposition.
Actually,
the
pattern
of
party
positions
on
foreign
policy
is
different
from
that
of
party
positions
on
internal
questions
in
Denmark.
This
anomaly
has
a
long
histori-
cal
background
that
can
be
traced
back
at
least
to
the
formation
of
the
Radical
Party
in
1903,
and
even
all
the
way
back
to
r864
and
1870,
when
the
choice
between
alliance
and
neutrality
presented
itself
to
the
Danish
Government
on
the
occasion
of
the
Franco-
Prussian
War.
At
that
time
the
Govern-
ment
opted,
wisely
as
it
turned
out,
for
neutrality,
and
neutrality
as
the
solution
to
the
Danish
security
problem
gained
a
strong
tradition
in
Denmark
in
the
following
years
and
generations.
This
tradition
was
confirmed
in
the
1930’s
when
half-hearted
Danish
attempts
to
sound
out
Swedish,
Norwegian
and
British
policy-makers
on
the
possibility
of
collective
defence
arrange-
ments
proved
fruitless,
since
none
of
these
countries
was
prepared
to
enter
into
com-
mitments
for
the
geographically
very
ex-
posed
Denmark.
The
German
occupation
in
194o
proved
that
there
was
no
security
in
neutrality,
at
least
not
in
the
kind
of
neutrality
observed
by
the
Danish
Government
which
was
a
practically
undefended
neutrality.
This
con-
clusion,
however,
did
not
change
the
basic
fact
that
no
foreign
guarantees
had
been
available,
nor
did
it
persuade
everybody
that
such
guarantees
could
have
saved
Den-
mark
from
German
invasion
and
occupa-
tion,
since
the
Western
Powers
proved
unable
to
protect
even
Norway,
despite
its
far
more
advantageous
geographic
situa-
tion.
Thus
when
after
the
war
a
solution
to
the
security
problem
had
to
be
found
again,
To continue reading
Request your trial