Russland - fortsatt en trussel for Norge etter den kalde krigen? : en studie av Forsvarsdepartementets og Utenriksdepartementets responser på endrede sikkerhetspolitiske omgivelser

Med slutten av den kalde krigen opphørte delingen av Europa og spenningen mellom to maktblokker. Dette medførte at norsk sikkerhetspolitisk tenkning ble utfordret. Oppgaven undersøker Russlands plass i det norske trusselbildet gjennom 1990-tallet. Analysen er rettet mot henholdsvis Forsvarsdepartementets og Utenriksdepartementets responser på de relativt dramatiske endringer i de sikkerhetspolitiske omgivelser. En sentral del i oppgaven har vært å beskrive utviklingen av sikkerhetsbegrepet, samt NATO og for de militære styrker i Nordvest-Russland. Dette for å vise om det eksisterte et grunnlag for å endre tilnærmingen til Russland eller opprettholde kontinuiteten fra den kalde krigen. Jeg har funnet betydelige forskjeller i departementenes respons. Dette omfatter både grad og form på responsen. Forsvarsdepartementets respons karakteriseres i stort av kontinuitet fra den kalde krigen med tradisjonell øst-vest tenkning, mens UD i sterkere grad viser endring og en tenkning basert på sentrum-periferi.The end of the Cold War increased the political stability in Europe and reduced the risk of a future war between NATO and its former enemy; the Warsaw Pact. Instead NATO in its strategic concept of 1991 introduced a broad concept of security encompassing political, economic, social and environmental aspects along with the military dimension. NATO no longer faced the former threat of a massive attack from the East. This new thinking challenged the Norwegian approach to security that had been characterised by national consensus during the Cold War.The aim of this paper is to examine to what extent Norwegian authorities have changed their view upon and relations towards Russia during the 1990s. Has the Norwegian approach been changed or is it still characterised by the Cold War. The paper has been concentrated on examining the responses of the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The theory used is focusing on change and stability in foreign policy. The theory discusses a variety of factors that may have an impact on whether a specific foreign policy is likely to endure or to change. It stresses the importance of the impact of stabilisers, tending to inhibit change in foreign policy even when there is a pressure for change.The method used is a descriptive analysis with a comparative view. I have examined official parliamentary bills from the Ministries and official speeches. This to find out if their responses is characterised by change or continuation of Cold War policies. As a major part I described the development of a wider security concept, the development in NATO as for the military forces in the Northwestern part of Russia.Conclusions show to an extensive point that there are differences in the Ministries responses. This includes both the degree and the extent of the response. The Ministry of Defence is more dominated by the traditional thinking - Russia could still be a potential threat to Norwegian security. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs response is corresponding more to major NATO members' responses. The Russian threat is not the military one, but an environmental. The solution to future challenges is in their point of view co-operation.Avdelning: ALB - Slutet Mag 3 C-upps.Hylla: Upps. ChP 99-0