Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Jumping on the Bandwagon: status seeking as a driver for Sweden’s involvement in NATO-led operations?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Politics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Why do the non-aligned small states such as Sweden participate in NATO-led operations and interventions where it has no immanent interests at play? This article argues that status seeking and building a good relation with the USA plays a central role in explaining small states participation in US-led interventions. Theoretically, the article contributes to our understanding of the concept of ‘status’ in international relations by offering a new explanation of the puzzling willingness of small unaligned states to use military means in NATO-led operations. Empirically, the article contributes to our understanding of the status-seeking strategies of the Nordic countries, which indicates that the Nordic countries in some respect have departed from the traditional Nordic emphasis on soft power.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bailes, A.J.K., A.T. Bradley, and B. Thorhallsson. 2016. Alliance Theory and Alliance ‘Shelter’: The Complexities of Small State Alliance Behaviour. Third World Thematics 1(1): 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, D., and R.B. Pedersen. 2013. Process Tracing Methods: Foundations and Guidelines. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, D., and R.B. Pedersen. 2016. Causal Case Studies Foundations and Guidelines for Comparing, Matching, and Tracing. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, A. 2014. Appendix: Disciplining Our Conjectures—Systematizing Process Tracing with Bayesian Analysis. In Process Tracing: From Metaphor to Analytic Tool, ed. Andrew Bennett and Jeffrey Checkel, 276–298. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Björkdahl, A. 2013. Ideas and Norms in Swedish Peace Policy. Swiss Political Science Review 19(3): 322–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dafoe, A., J. Renshon, and P. Huth. 2014. Reputation and Status As Motives for War. Annual Review of Political Science 17: 371–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darryl, Press. 2005. Calculating credibility. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Cavalho, B., and I.B. Neumann. 2015. Introduction: Small States and Status. In Small State Status Seeking. Norway’s Quest for International Standing, ed. I.B. Neumann and B. de Cavalho, 1–21. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doeser, F. 2014a. Sweden’s Libya Decision: A Case of Humanitarian Intervention. International Politics 51: 196–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doeser, F. 2014b. Sweden’s Participation in Operation Unified Protector: Obligations and Interests. International Peacekeeping 21(5): 642–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doeser, F. 2016. Finland, Sweden and Operation Unified Protector: The Impact of Strategic Culture. Comparative Strategy 35(4): 284–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg, T. 2013. The Rise of Nordic Defence Cooperation: A Return to Regionalism? International Affairs 89(5): 1161–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gotkowska, J., and P. Szymański .2016. Pro-American non-alignment. Sweden and Finland develop closer military co-operation with the United States. OSW Commentary, 1 April 2016.

  • Græger, N. 2015. From ‘Forces for Good’ to ‘Forces for Status’? Small State Military Status-Seeking. In Small State Status Seeking. Norway’s Quest for International Standing, ed. B. de Cavalho and I.B. Neumann, 86–107. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haesebrouck, T. 2017a. “NATO Burden Sharing in Libya: A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Journal of Conflict Resolution 61(10): 2235–2261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haesebrouck, T. 2017b. EU Member State Participation in Military Operations: A Configurational Comparative Analysis. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 30(2–3): 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, B. 2010. Unipolarity and World Politics: A Theory and Its Application. London: Routhledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Henriksen, A., and J. Ringsmose. 2012. What Did Denmark Gain? Iraq, Afghanistan and the Relationship with Washington. In Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 2012, ed. N. Hvidt and H. Mouritzen, 157–181. Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingebritsen, C. 2002. Norm Entrepreneurs: Scandinavia’s Role in World Politics. Cooperation and Conflict 37: 11–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsen, P.V. 2006. The Nordic Peacekeeping Model: Rise, Fall, Resurgence? International Peacekeeping 13(3): 381–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsen, P.V. 2017. The United Nations and the Nordic Four: Cautious Sceptics, Committed Believers, Cost-Benefit Calculators. In The Routledge Handbook of Scandinavian Politics, ed. Peter Nedergaard and Anders Wivel, 281–293. London: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jakobsen, P.V., J. Ringsmose, and H.L. Saxi. 2016. Bandwagoning for Prestige: Denmark, Norway and the War on Terror. Paper Presented at the CEEISA-ISA Joint International Conference, 22–25 June 2016. Ljubljana, Slovenia.

  • Jakobsen, P.V., J. Ringsmose, and H.L. Saxi. 2018. Prestige-Seeking Small States: Danish and Norwegian Military Contributions to U.S.-Led Operations. European Journal of International Security 3(2): 256–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, M. 2017. Strategic Colonels: The Discretion of Swedish Force Commanders in Afghanistan 2006–2013. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaim, M. 2017. Reforming NATO’s Partnerships. SWP Research Paper, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik: German Institute for International and Security Affairs.

  • Lawlor, P. 2005. The Good State in World Politics: In Praise of Classical Internationalism. Review of International Studies 31(3): 427–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor, P. 2007. Janus-Faced Solidarity Danish Internationalism Reconsidered. Cooperation and Conflict 42: 101–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindén, D. 2013. US-Sweden Today: The Ties that Carl Built. The Local, 8 August 2013. https://www.thelocal.se/20130808/49534. Accessed 24 May 2018.

  • Mercer, J. 1996. Reputation and International Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, J. 2017. The Illusion of International Prestige. International Security 41(4): 133–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R.R. 2012. Lisbon and the Evolution of NATO’s New Partnership Policy. Perceptions 17(1): 55–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouritzen, H. 2007. Denmark’s Super Atlanticism. Journal of Transatlantic Stud-ies 5(2): 155–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NATO. 2013. Sweden: One of NATO’s Most Active and Effective Partners. NATO, 14 January 2013. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_93853.htm. Accessed 28 May 2018.

  • Nilsson, C., and K. Zetterlund. 2016. Sweden and the UN: A Rekindled Partnership for Peacekeeping? International Peacekeeping 23(5): 762–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M., and R. Zeckhauser. 1996. An Economic Theory of Alliances. Review of Economics and Statistics 48(3): 266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oma, Ida Maria, and Petersson, Magnus. 2019. Exploring the role of dependence in influencing small states’ alliance contributions: A reputation mechanism argument and assessment. European Security. https://doi.org/10.1080/09662839.2019.1589455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, R.B. 2018. Bandwagon for Status: Changing Patterns in the Nordic States Status-Seeking Strategies? International Peacekeeping 25(2): 217–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, R.B., and Y. Reykers. 2017. Bandwagon for Status: Danish and Belgium Participation in the Coalition Against ISIS. Paper Presented at the Danish Political Science Association Annual Meeting, 26 October 2017. Vejle, Denmark.

  • Renshon, J. 2016. Status Deficits and War. International Organization 70: 513–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riksdagen. 2010–2011a. Parliamentary debate 16. Marts 2011.

  • Riksdagen. 2010–2011b. Parliamentary debate 17. Marts 2011.

  • Ringsmose, J. 2010. NATO Burden Sharing Redux: Continuity and Change After the Cold War. Contemporary Security Policy 31(2): 319–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savel, Maria. 2016. Can the Nordic Countries Capitalize on Their Strategic Position in Europe? World Politics Review. https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/18878/can-the-nordic-countries-capitalize-on-their-strategic-position-in-europe. Accessed 29 May 2019.

  • Schmitt, Oliver. 2018. Allies that Count Junior Partners in Coalition Warfare. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schweller, R. 1994. Bandwagoning for Profit: Bringing the Revisionist State Back In. International Security 19: 72–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Syrén, H. 2006. The Transformation of the Swedish Armed Forces. NATO’s Nations and Partners for Peace, No. 3, 114–117.

  • The Swedish Government. 2008. Regeringens skrivelse 2007/08:51. Nationell strategi för svenskt deltagande i internationell freds-och säkerhetsfrämjande verksamhet. 13 March 2008. https://data.riksdagen.se/fil/6FB99583-BBD2-4F20-B0B3-71175149E136. Assessed 16 June 2018.

  • Wagnsson, C. 2011. A Security Community in the Making? Sweden and NATO Post-Libya. European Security 20(4): 585–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walt, S.M. 1991. Alliance Formation in Southwest Asia: Balancing and Bandwagoning in Cold War Competition. In Dominoes and Bandwagons: Strategic Beliefs and Great Power Competition in the Eurasian Rimland, ed. J. Robert and J. Snyder, 51–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wivel, Anders. 2005. From Peacemaker to Warmonger? Explaining Denmark’s Great Power Politics. Swiss Political Science Review 19 (2013): 298–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlforth, W.C. 2009. Unipolarity, Status Competition, and Great Power War. World Politics 1: 28–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, S. 2013. Prestige in World Politics: History, Theory, Expression. International Politics 50: 387–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark

    Rasmus Brun Pedersen

Authors
  1. Rasmus Brun Pedersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rasmus Brun Pedersen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pedersen, R.B. Jumping on the Bandwagon: status seeking as a driver for Sweden’s involvement in NATO-led operations?. Int Polit 57, 41–56 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-019-00175-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-019-00175-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation