| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
167458
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
In complex operations such as the interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan, where multiple government ministries are involved in putting together a state’s contributions, the use of national-level coordination bodies has become more widespread. Research has taken for granted that the rationale behind these bodies reflects their declared aim – enhanced coordination as a means to improve mission effectiveness. However, they appear to have had modest effect on coordination. That notwithstanding, they seem to remain popular. This prompts us to ask why such bodies are actually established. This article – based on in-depth interviews and archival records – critically explores the establishment of Norway’s ad hoc, inter-ministerial, political-level Afghanistan Forum. Distinguishing between a structural-instrumental, a cultural-institutional and an environmental perspective from organizational theory to structure the analysis, this article shows that the declared purpose of the forum, inter-ministerial coordination, proved less important than showcasing coordination efforts and keeping the coalition together. In addition, national traditions in handling coordination challenges in the central government apparatus and powerful international reforms helped bring the forum about. This has implications for research on the rationale and effectiveness of these bodies, and also for understanding their policy relevance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
181960
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores how military ‘frontline workers’ use their discretion to interpret and then comply, breach or bypass policies that reach into the tactical level, and why. Based on extensive primary sources including in-depth interviews, end-of-tour reports and data from records, the case study explores the implementation of policies on civil-military relations by military commanders in the Norwegian-led Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Afghanistan in 2005–2012. This article finds that the commanders used their considerable discretion to implement policies that parted from national directives. In doing so, the Norwegian military strove to align their approach with close allies and NATO and became actual policy-makers. This article contributes to the debate on how western militaries behave at the tactical level by employing the concept of ‘discretion’.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
186899
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Whole-of-government coordination has produced meagre results if measured against declared aims. However, an assessment of such coordination efforts should include also unstated aims. Based on an in-depth study of the primary high-level coordination body for Norway’s Afghanistan engagement, this article finds that the body was successful in pursuing symbolic politics. Showcasing was an underlying but non-declared aim of the body in question. These findings are significant because they provide an explanation why governments continue to pursue this kind of coordination efforts despite their apparent lack of success. Improved coordination was achieved mostly in terms of information sharing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|