When Foreign Policy Interests Collide - Motivation, policy instruments, costs and dilemmas related to Norway’s foreign policy objective on the promotion and protection of human rights

Abstract

Let us suppose there have been severe human rights violations in a country. How does the MFA assess whether to act? If Norway shall act, how does the MFA deliberate what actions to take? Should Norway condemn the violations publicly – or raise concerns privately? Should Norway work bilaterally – or take joint action with other countries? What if the country in question is a close partner of Norway's development programmes? What if vital Norwegian business interests are present in the country? And what if public criticism will worsen the bilateral relationship with a country Norway is dependent on to achieve other foreign policy goals? The promotion of human rights has been defined as an independent objective in Norway’s foreign policy since the 1970s. This thesis explores MFA’s work on this policy goal and discusses the following research questions: What is Norway’s motivation by making human rights promotion an independent foreign policy goal? How does the Ministry of Foreign Affairs consider if and how to react to human rights violations in other states – and which policy instruments does it favour? And: Does the MFA perceive dilemmas between the promotion of human rights and other national interests in Norway’s foreign policy? The research questions are addressed through an extensive document analysis of literature and policy documents - and through semi-structured interviews with bureaucrats and former members of MFA’s Political leadership during the Stoltenberg and Solberg governments (2005-2013, 2013-2021).