Status seeking in the friendly Nordic neighborhood
| DOI | 10.1177/0010836719828410 |
| Date | 01 December 2019 |
| Published date | 01 December 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
https://doi.org/10.1177/0010836719828410
Cooperation and Conflict
2019, Vol. 54(4) 562 –579
© The Author(s) 2019
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0010836719828410
journals.sagepub.com/home/cac
Status seeking in the friendly
Nordic neighborhood
Pål Røren
Abstract
The article argues that the way status is pursued in social groups in world politics is contingent on
the type of social relations that constitute interaction between the members. The Nordic region
is a group of countries marked by friendship and trust. Here, the numerous societal linkages
between the Nordic countries have made their region into a ‘friendly neighborhood’. This has
changed the way that these countries pursue status. To explore this status dynamic, the article
draws on a series of interviews with Nordic diplomats and argues that a strong friendship both
enables collective status seeking, and constrains individual status seeking. Specifically, turning their
social group into a friendly neighborhood allows the Nordic countries to posture as a collective
polity and seek status on behalf of it. This grants them more status recognition in world politics.
Moreover, friendship does not eliminate status rivalry, but it does turn it into a friendly kind of
status competition. Indeed, while the intra-regional intensity of the competition endures, the
article finds that the Nordic countries are unlikely to compete in ways that might harm their
friendship or their neighborhood.
Keywords
diplomacy, friendship, Nordic countries, practice theory, social groups, status
Introduction
When Swedish Foreign Minister Margot Wallström in 2014 launched her government’s
feminist foreign policy, it was partially due to Sweden consistently being regarded as,
according to Wallström herself, ‘a humanitarian superpower (Radio Sweden, 2015).
Likewise, one of the aims for Denmark, when it joined the US-led coalition of the will-
ing in 2003, was not only to address security concerns, but also to relinquish its ‘small
state mentality’, reestablish itself as a close NATO ally and to build a stronger reputa-
tion for resolve (Lunde Saxi, 2010; Mandag Morgen, 2006). Finally, when former
Foreign Minister of Norway, Jonas Gahr Støre, criticized the G20‘s membership policy,
it was not only to secure future economic gain (Der Spiegel, 2010); it was also an
attempt to lobby for Nordic membership in a club that could elevate Norway, Sweden,
Corresponding author:
Pål Røren, Department of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark,
Campusvej 55, 5230 Odense, Denmark.
Email: roeren@sam.sdu.dk
828410CAC0010.1177/0010836719828410Cooperation and ConflictRøren
research-article2019
Article
Røren 563
Finland, Iceland and Denmark’s status in the world. As in most countries, status is –
along with its etymological relatives standing, rank, reputation, honor, and prestige –
very often a consciously sought by-product of a wide range of Nordic foreign policies.
These smaller countries do not seek domination, but rather focus on niches that they
hope will see them turn enough heads to elevate their standing among their peers (De
Carvalho and Lie, 2015).
Due to their relatively low hierarchical position, the Nordic countries are often left
competing for what has been labeled as ‘good power’ status (De Carvalho and Neumann,
2015). This entails trying to ‘play on their moral authority when seeking to increase
their status’, and, ‘to be perceived as good, reliable partners in a hegemonic arrange-
ment or within a multilateral set-up’ (De Carvalho and Neumann, 2015: 11). While all
the Nordic countries arguably have the status of ‘good power’, they still compete to
stand out among the good powers. To be sure, because social status is positional and
relative, not everyone can be the best good power. As the existing status research often
notes: ‘[i]f everyone has high status, then no one does.’ (Paul et al., 2014: 9) Indeed, it
is no surprise that many scholars have highlighted how the pursuit of status among the
Nordic countries is frequently competitive (De Carvalho and Neumann, 2015; Pedersen,
2017; Wohlforth et al., 2017).
However, decades of cultural exchange and close cooperation has reshaped the inter-
action between these countries and forged a bond of friendship. Indeed, as the example
of the former Norwegian foreign minister illustrates, the Nordic countries often promote
and seek status on behalf of the Nordic region. In addition, even if the Nordic countries
compete intensely to be placed on top of the Nordic status hierarchy, this competition is
not fought with animosity or violence. Thus, the Nordic foreign policy constellation
forms a puzzle for the established literature on status in international relations (IR). As
envisioned in this literature, status seeking is normally a competitive, and often violent,
pursuit of what countries see as a scarce and sometimes zero sum good (see for instance
Deng, 2008: 292; Nitoiu, 2016; Onea, 2014: 152). Indeed, if the pursuit of social status
among the Nordic countries is a competition to stand out from the rest, as one would
expect reading existing literature in IR, then cooperation and friendly competition for
social status makes little sense. In other words, if international status is a relative and
positional good, how can each Nordic country compete in a friendly way with the other
Nordic countries for the same type of social status while at the same time, through shared
Nordic cooperative practices, seek to increase the social status of their competitors?
To answer this question, and to understand how status concerns play out in each of
these countries’ foreign policies, this article investigates Nordic diplomatic practices of
status seeking and friendship. Expanding upon ideas of functional and ideational status
peer groups in IR, I suggest that the way in which status is pursued in groups in world
politics is contingent on the type of social relations that constitute interaction between
the members. The Nordic region is a group of countries marked by friendship and trust.
Conceptualized as a ‘friendly neighborhood’, I suggest that just as the friendly or
unfriendly relations between neighbors shape their social interaction, so should they
affect the Nordic neighbors’ pursuit of status in world politics.
I invoke practice theory to explore how friendship and the communal feeling of soli-
darity informs, constrains and shapes their status seeking. Methodologically, I rely on 21
To continue reading
Request your trial