ARCTIC CAPABILITY PACKAGE THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG?: A mapping study of Danish-Greenlandic defence and security politics focusing on an increasingly complicated policy process
Translated title
ARCTIC CAPABILITY PACKAGE THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG?
Authors
Holmgaard, Joakim Nørkjær ; Nielsen, Nanna Kjær ; Nielsen, Katherina Madhuri
Term
4. term
Publication year
2022
Pages
90
Abstract
Det seneste år har sikkerhedspolitikken mellem Grønland og Danmark været turbulent, centreret om Arctic Capability Package (ACP), en politisk pakke om arktisk sikkerhed og forsvar. Den langsomme og utraditionelle proces skabte uenigheder mellem regeringen i København og Grønlands Selvstyre (Naalakkersuisut) i Nuuk. I februar 2021 blev ACP præsenteret på et pressemøde med kun danske folketingspolitikere til stede, hvilket udløste protester i Grønland over manglende, lovpligtig inddragelse af grønlandske myndigheder i sikkerhedspolitik vedrørende grønlandsk territorium. I maj 2022 underskrev den danske regering og Naalakkersuisut en supplerende Principaftale, som præciserede og ændrede dele af ACP. Specialet undersøger ACP’s politiske forløb gennem interviews med eksperter og aktører i processen samt officielle dokumenter, herunder den arktiske analyse fra 2016 og Principaftalen. Analysen bygger på policycyklussen (Howlett og Ramesh, 2003), der beskriver politikudvikling som fem faser fra dagsordensætning til evaluering. Fordi ACP blev til på usædvanlig vis, overlappede faserne og blev mere komplekse. I dagsordensfasen anvendes Bacchis “What’s the problem represented to be?” (WPR, 2009) til at undersøge, hvordan den danske regering fremstiller problemet, så analysen forbliver fokuseret og uden politisk slagside. I beslutningsfasen anvendes Hayes’ (i Morcol, 2007) fortolkning af Lindbloms incrementalismeteori (1965), som forklarer, at politiske beslutninger ofte sker gennem små skridt frem for store reformer. Diskussionen reflekterer over de udfordrede kommunikationsstrømme mellem grønlandske og danske myndigheder og drøfter, hvordan postkoloniale bånd og forskellige militære traditioner i Grønland og Danmark kan præge nutidige politiske processer og retlige rammer. Konklusionen er, at svag kommunikation og mangelfuld informationsdeling er hovedårsager til, at det er komplekst at formulere og gennemføre arktisk sikkerheds- og forsvarspolitik i Rigsfællesskabet. Grønlandske politiske aktører har haft begrænset adgang til information og høring og dermed mindre indflydelse på beslutninger, blandt andet fordi de retlige grundlag for Grønlands inddragelse er uklart defineret.
In the past year, security politics between Greenland and Denmark have been turbulent, centered on the Arctic Capability Package (ACP), a policy package on Arctic security and defense. The slow and unorthodox process created disagreements between the Danish government in Copenhagen and the Greenlandic Self-Government (Naalakkersuisut) in Nuuk. In February 2021, the ACP was presented at a press conference attended only by Danish parliamentarians, prompting protests in Greenland over the lack of the legally required inclusion of Greenlandic authorities in security policy affecting Greenlandic territory. In May 2022, the Danish government and Naalakkersuisut signed an additional Principle Agreement that clarified and changed parts of the ACP. This thesis examines the ACP policy process through interviews with experts and participants, and through official documents, including the 2016 Arctic Analysis and the Principle Agreement. The analysis uses the policy cycle (Howlett and Ramesh, 2003), which views policymaking as five stages from agenda-setting to evaluation. Because the ACP followed an unusual path, the stages overlapped and became more complex. In the agenda-setting stage, the study applies Bacchi’s “What’s the problem represented to be?” (WPR, 2009) to examine how the Danish government defines the problem, helping the analysis stay focused and avoid political bias. In the decision-making stage, it uses Hayes’ (in Morcol, 2007) interpretation of Lindblom’s incrementalism (1965), which explains how governments often proceed through small steps rather than sweeping reforms. The discussion reflects on strained communication between Greenlandic and Danish authorities and considers how postcolonial ties and differing military traditions in Greenland and Denmark may shape current policy processes and legal frameworks. The thesis concludes that weak communication and information-sharing are key reasons why designing and implementing Arctic security and defense policy in the Kingdom of Denmark is so complex. Greenlandic policy actors have had limited access to information and consultation—and therefore less influence on decisions—partly because the legal basis for Greenland’s inclusion is vaguely defined.
[This summary has been rewritten with the help of AI based on the project's original abstract]
Keywords
Documents