Military Command Structures in the Baltic Sea Area

  • Bertel Heurlin


In observing the emerging security environment of the post-Cold War era, what role do military command structures play in the Baltic Sea area? For that matter, why is it important to identify and analyse military command structures at all? And what is be to understood by military command structures? What is substance and what is symbol ? Military command structures are also reflections of relations between states. How important are alliance relations involving military command structures in terms of integration? These questions form the theme of this chapter.1


Military Force Baltic State Baltic Country European Security Command Structure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Atlantic News.Google Scholar
  2. Archer, Clive (1996). ‘The Nordic Area as a “Zone of Peace,”’ Journal of Peace Research: 33 (4), pages 451–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arter, David (1996). ‘Finland: From Neutrality to NATO?’ European Security: 5 (4/Winter) 1996 ), pages 614–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barry, Charles (1996). ‘NATO’s Combined Joint Task Forces in Theory and Practice/ Survival: 38(1), pages 81–97.Google Scholar
  5. Bildt, Carl (1996). ‘Norden och Baltikum i eget PFP blir naturlig bas även för samarbete med Ryssland,’ Fritt Militärt Forum: 3 pages 32–35.Google Scholar
  6. Bitzinger, Richard A. (1996). ‘The Nordic/Baltic Region: A New Strategic Significance?’ Defense Analysis: 12 (3), pages 371–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. B:son Uller, Lennart (1996). ‘Sveriges försvar och Östersjöomradet,’ Fritt Militärt Forum: 3, pages 1–6.Google Scholar
  8. Documentation from the Danish Ministry of Defence (1995). ‘The Baltbat-Project.’Google Scholar
  9. Documentation from the Danish Ministry of Defence (1996). ‘Defence Cooperation around the Baltic Sea in 1997.’Google Scholar
  10. Heurlin, Bertel and Mouritzen, Hans (eds.) (1997). Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 1997. DUPI, Danish Institute of International Affairs.Google Scholar
  11. Cornish, Paul (1996). ‘European Security: The End of Architecture and the New NATO,’ International Affairs: 72 (4), pages 751–769.Google Scholar
  12. Dörfer, Ingemar (1996). Sverige är inte neutralt längre. Stockholm, Timbro.Google Scholar
  13. Eyal, Jonathan (1996). ‘NATO and European Security,’ Perspectives: 6–7, pages 17–27.Google Scholar
  14. Garthoff, Raymond L. (1994). The Great Transition. Washington.Google Scholar
  15. Gordon, Philip H. (1996). ‘Does the WEU Have a Role,’ The Washington Quarterly: 20 (1), pages 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goulden, John (1996). ‘NATO Approaching two Summits: The UK Perspective,’ RUSI Journal: December, pages 29–32.Google Scholar
  17. Hansen, Birthe (1995). European Security — 2000. Copenhagen Political Studies Press.Google Scholar
  18. Hansen, Birthe (1995). ‘Unipolarity and the Middle East.’ Unpublished PhD thesis. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  19. Hansen, Birthe and Heurlin, Bertel (eds.) (1997). The Baltic States in World Politics. Curzon Press (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  20. Halperin, Morton H. and Kanter, Arnold (1973). A Bureaucratic Perspective. Readings in American Foreign Policy.Google Scholar
  21. Heurlin, Bertel (1995). Security Problems in the New Europe. Copenhagen Political Studies Press.Google Scholar
  22. Heurlin, Bertel (1996). ‘The US Impact in European Security as We Approach the Year 2000,’ pages 118–135 in Orrenius, Anders and Truedson, Lars (eds.). Visions of European Security: Focal Point Sweden and Northern Europe. Stockholm, Olof Palme International Center.Google Scholar
  23. Heurlin, Bertel (1997). ‘From Two to One Superpower.’ Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  24. Hunter, Robert E. (1996). ‘The Evolution of NATO: The United States’ Perspective,’ RUSI Journal: Dccember, pages 33–37.Google Scholar
  25. Høy-Petersen, U. (1996). ‘Combined Joined Task Force koncepten,’ Tidsskrift for søvæen: 167 (5), pages 279–289.Google Scholar
  26. Knudsen, Olav F. (1996). ‘Bound to Fail?’: Regional Security Cooperation in the Baltic Sea Area and Northeast Asia. NUPI Working Paper:566. Oslo.Google Scholar
  27. Lejins, Atis (1996). ‘The “Threat” of NATO Enlargement to the Security of the Baltic States,’ Kungl Krigsvetenskapsakademiens Handlinger och tidskrift: 200 (3), pages 77–82.Google Scholar
  28. Mandag Morgen (1997). Hvad skal Danmark?: Visioner og provokationer om Danmarks rolle i det 21. århundredes Europa. Copenhagen, Mandag Morgen.Google Scholar
  29. McCalla, Robert B. (1996). ‘NATO’s Persistence after the Cold War,’ International Organization: 50 (3/Summer), pages 445–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moshes, Arkady and Vushkarnik, Anton (1997). ‘Russia and the Baltic States: Between Coexistence and Cooperation?’ IWPS: 1, pages 77–100.Google Scholar
  31. NATO Hand book (1995). Brussels, Nato Office of Information and Press. Reprinted edition, with amendments.Google Scholar
  32. Reichel, Klaus (1996). “Nachdenken in Helsinki — Die Sicherheitspolitik Finnlands,’ Information Für Die Truppe: 12, pages 36–44.Google Scholar
  33. Richthofen, Hermann Frhr von (1996). ‘The Evolution of NATO from a German Point of View,’ RUSI Journal: December, pages 39–44.Google Scholar
  34. Rühle, Michael and William, Nick (1996). ‘Partnership for Peace after NATO Enlargement,’ European Security: 5 (4/Winter), pages 521–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Ruggie, John Gerard (1996). ‘Consolidating the European Pillar: The Key to NATO’s Future,’ The Washington Quarterly: 20 (1), pages 109–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. SNU, Det Sikkerheds- og nedrustningspolitiske udvalg (1996). Grønland under den Kolde Krig. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  37. Snyder, Glenn (1984). ‘The Security Dilemma in Alliance Politics,’ World Politics: 36, pages 461–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Szlajfer, Henryk (1996). ‘The Enlargement of NATO: A Polish View,’ RUSI Journal: December, pages 49–54.Google Scholar
  39. U.S. Department of State (1997). ‘Report to the Congress on the Enlargement of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization: Rationale, Benefits, Costs and Implications.’Google Scholar
  40. Værnø, Grethe (1996). ‘Nordiske Sikkerhetsinteresser: Felles Interesser- Felles Politikk?’ FHSFS Projekstgruppe ‘Sikkerhet i Norden.’ Hefte nr. 2/1996 i Forsvarets høgskoleforening, Studieutvalgets skriftserie.Google Scholar
  41. Waltz, Kenneth N., (1979) (Reprinted with corrections 1983). Theory of International Politics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bertel Heurlin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations