Past, present, and future: the role of the Cold War in legitimising Danish foreign policy activism

Abstract

The Cold War has had an extended life span in Danish foreign policy due to the establishment of a right-wing revisionist agenda. This article argues that this revisionism came to serve different contemporary purposes under the Anders Fogh Rasmussen governments. Externally it was used to legitimise the Danish participation in the Iraq War and came to serve as a tool to discipline the war-sceptical social democratic led opposition and secured parliamentary support for an offensive Liberal-inspired activism in Danish foreign policy. Domestically the revisionism became entangled with the overall cultural war that the Liberal-led government launched and thereby became a part of the overall ideological war that united the governing coalition from 2001 to 2011.

Notes

¹ See Rasmus Brun Pedersen, “Danish Foreign Policy Activism: A Case of Differences or Degree?” Cooperation and Conflict 47, no. 3 (2012): 331–49; Sten Rynning: “Denmark as a Strategic Actor? Danish Security Policy after 11 September,” Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 2003 (København: DIIS, 2003), pp. 23–46; Kristian Søby Kristensen, ed., Danmark i krig: demokrati, politik og strategi i den militære aktivisme (København: Djøf/Jurist- og Økonomforbundet, 2013). For an oversight of the litterature see Rasmus Brun Pedersen and Karen Gram-Skjoldager, “Brud eller kontinuitet? International aktivisme i dansk udenrigspolitik 2001–2011. En tværfaglig forskningsstatus,” Historisk tidsskrift 2 (forthcoming 2015).

² Rosanna Farbøl, “Kunsten at lægge historien til rette. AFR og opgøret med den danske udenrigspolitiske tradition,” Temp – tidsskrift for historie 3 (2012): 65–89; “Irakkrigen og dens historiske legitimering,” Slagmark 60 (2011): 73–87.

³ Thorsten Borring Olesen, “Truth on Demand: Denmark and the Cold War,” in Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 2006, ed. Nanna Hvidt and Hans Mouritzen (Copenhagen: DIIS, 2006), 80–113.

⁴ Nikolaj Petersen, “Kampen om Den Kolde Krig i dansk politik og forskning,” Historisk Tidsskrift 109, no. 1 (2009): 154–204.

⁵ “Revisionism,” US Foreign Policy Encyclopedia (The Gale Group, ).

⁶ The argument has been promoted by Petersen, “Kampen,” 154–5; Olesen, “Thruth on Demand; Farbøl, Kunsten at ligge historien til rette;” Hans Branner, “Brug og misbrug af den udenrigspolitiske historie,” (2004), Udenrigs, Årg. 59, nr. 1. 26–36; Rasmus Brun Pedersen, “Revanchisme og revisionisme i dansk udenrigspolitik,” Politica 45, no. 3 (2013): 344–61; See also the work of Bent Jensen, Ulve, får og vogtere – Den Kolde Krig i Danmark 1945–1991 Bind 1 og 2 (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2014) that has been seen as an example on this.

⁷ Farbøl, “Irakkrigen;” Bernard Eric Jensen, Carsten Tage Nielsen, and Torben Weinreich, Erindringens og glemslens politik (Copenhagen: Roskilde Universitetsforlag, 1996).

⁸ Richard Ned Lebow, “The Memory of Politics in Postwar Europe,” in The Politics of Memory in Postwar Europe, ed. Richard Ned Lebow, Wulf Kansteiner, and Claudio Fogu (Durham & London: Duke University Press, 2006) .

⁹ Farbøl, “Kunsten,” 68: 1–39.

¹⁰ Olesen, “Truth on Demand;” Thorsten Borring Olesen, “Under the National Paradigm: Cold War Studies and Cold War Politics in Post-Cold War Norden,” Cold War History 8, no. 2 (2008): 189–211; Farbøl, “Irakkrigen;” “Kunsten.”

¹¹ Klas-Göran Karlsson, “Historiedidaktikk: begrepp, teori och analys,” in Historien är nu. En introduktion till historiedidaktiken, ed. Klas-Göran Karlsson and Ulf Zander (Lund: Studentlitteratur, 25–71).

¹² See Niels Kayser Nielsen, Historiens forvandlinger – historiebrug fra monumenter til oplevelsesøkonomi (Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 2010); Klas-Göran Karlsson, Historia som vapen: historiebruk och Sovjetunionens upplösning 1985–1995 (Stockholm: Natur och Kultur, 1999).

¹³ Domestic polarisation in Danish foreign policy is not unprecedented. See Thorsten Borring Olesen and Poul Villaume, I blokopdelingens tegn 1945–1972. Dansk udenrigspolitiks historie (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2005).

¹⁴ The alternative majority also tabled other far-reaching proposals that the government considered detrimental to Danish security interests and NATO solidarity. This situation was allowed to continue for six years because the government refused to step down when it suffered parliamentary defeats in the Folketing.

¹⁵ Nikolaj Petersen, “‘Footnoting’ as a Political Instrument: Denmark’s NATO Policy in the 1980s,” Cold War History 12, no. 2 (2012): 295–317; Rasmus Brun Pedersen, “‘Footnote Policy’ and the Social Democratic Party’s Role in Shaping Danish EEC Positions, 1982–1986,” Scandinavian Journal of History 38, no. 5 (2013): 636–57

¹⁶ Danish Institute for International Studies 2005. Danmark under den kolde krig volume 3: 233 fn1.

¹⁷ Lasse Budtz, Her stod vi af. Fodnoterne, der skabte historie, 1998; Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, Fodfejl, 2004; Hans Engell, På Slotsholmen, 1997, 118–80; Bent Jensen, Tryk og Tilpasning. Sovjetunionen og Danmark siden 2. verdenskrig, 1987; Niels Jæger, Socialdemokratiet Det Historiske Svigt og venstrefløjen i den kolde krig, 1999; Kjeld Olesen, “Det var et spørgsmål om balance,” Information, January 29, 2000; Erling Olsen, “En note om fodnoter,” På sporet af europæisk sikkerhed, Atlantsammenslutningen, 1999; Robert Pedersen, Gør Din Pligt Kræv Din Ret: Erindringer (Copenhagen: Holkenfeldt, 1994), ss. 158–217; Gert Petersen, Inden for systemet og udenfor. Erindringer, 1998: 274–87, 298–9, 307–34; Poul Schlüter, Sikken Et Liv, 1999, ss. 140–53, 220–25; Pelle Voigt, Sejre og fodfejl set i mit bakspejl, 1999.

¹⁸ Petersen, “Footnoting,” 296.

¹⁹ See also Pedersen, “Revanchisme og revisionisme,” 344–61.

²⁰ For instance Bertel Haarder, Hvem holdt de med? (Copenhagen: Peter la Cours Forlag, 1999).

²¹ AFR, “Opgør med medløberne,” Berlingske Tidende, February 27, 1997.

²² AFR, “Et opgør med fortiden trænger sig på,” in Hvem holdt de med? ed. Bertel Haarder (Copenhagen: Peter la Cours Forlag, 1999), 8.

²³ The purpose was to analyse whether nuclear weapons had been deployed in Greenland during the early years of the Cold War, contrary to the official Danish policy, and whether Danish governments sanctioned it.

²⁴ Petersen, “Kampen,” 180.

²⁵ The commission was charged with two major tasks: to examine PET and to describe the outcome of the investigation conducted by PET (see PET kommissionens beretning bind 1, 2009: 10–26) http://www.petkommissionen.dk.

²⁶ Politiets efterretningsvirksomhed på det politiske område 1945–1989 (Copenhagen: Justitsministeriet Schultz Forlag, 2009).

²⁷ See Olesen, “Truth on Demand.”

²⁸ Quoted in Olesen, “Truth on Demand,” 83.

²⁹ Olesen, “Truth on Demand,” 86

³⁰ The report had a rather broad focus and was commissioned with five tasks: (1) to describe military threats towards Denmark, (2) to describe salient aspects of Danish security policies, (3) to describe Soviet and East Bloc active measures directed towards Denmark and East Bloc contacts in Denmark, (4) to describe the public debate in Denmark on Danish security policies and (5) to describe Eastern and Western perceptions of Danish security policies.

³¹ I will not go deeper into the treatment of the DIIS report. For an excellent overview see e.g., Olesen, “Truth on Demand;” “Under the National Paradigm;” Petersen, “Kampen.” See also Erik Beukel, DIIS’ udredning om Danmark under den kolde krig og den efterfølgende mediedebat, Politologiske skrifter, Vol. 14 (Odense: University of Southern Denmark, 2005).

³² Jesper Langballe, quoted in “Venstrefløjen skal undersøges,” Politiken, August 31, 2002.

³³ Jensen, Ulve, får og vogtere.

³⁴ Petersen, “Kampen,” 157; Hans Mortensen, Tid til forandring. Venstres vej til magten (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2008), 125–37.

³⁵ Peter Kurrild-Klitgaard, “Kontraktpolitik, kulturkamp og ideologi,” Økonomi og Politik 84 (September 2011): 47–62.

³⁶ This strategy was inspired by the 1994 Republican campaign, “Contract with America.”

³⁷ Kurrild-Klitgaard, “Kontraktpolitik.”

³⁸ Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Fra Socialstat til minimalstat (Copenhagen; Samlerens Forlag, 1993), pp. 34, 226.

³⁹ Arne Hardis og Hans Mortensen, “Kulturkamp Interview: Anders Fogh Rasmussen,” Weekendavisen January 17, 2003: s. 1, p. 5.

⁴⁰ AFR, “Hvad kan det nytte?” Berlingske Tidende, March 26, 2003.

⁴¹ Anders Fogh Rasmussen, “Danmark må gøre op med småstatsmentaliteten,” Ugebrevet Mandag Morgen, September 11, 2006.

⁴² Pedersen, “Danish Foreign Policy Activism.”

⁴³ Statsminister AFRs tale ved Forsvarsakademiets årsdag fredag den 31. oktober 2003, “Danmark i verden” (speech, Royal Danish Defence College, October 31, 2003), www.stm.dk

⁴⁴ Ole Wæver quoted in Martin Kaae and Jesper Nissen, Vejen til Irak – Hvorfor gik Danmark i krig? (Copenhagen: Gads Forlag, 2008), 224–5.

⁴⁵ “AFRs tale ved 60-året for den 29. august 1943,” speech given on August 29, 2003, www.stm.dk

⁴⁶ The activism and militarisation of the Danish foreign and security policy of the 1990s under various Social Democratic governments was not mentioned in this respect.

⁴⁷ Rasmussen, “Hvad kan det nytte?”

⁴⁸ Farbøl, “Irakkrigen,” 73–85; “Kunsten,” 65–89.

⁴⁹ AFR, “Visioner om Danmarks aktive Europapolitik,” speech given on September 23, 2003, www.stm.dk.

⁵⁰ See also Rasmussen, “60-året for 29. august 1943;” “Tale i Mindelunden,” speech given on May 4, 2005; “Tale i anledning af 60-året for Danmarks befrielse,” speech given on May 5, 2005; “Tale i Mindelunden,” speech given on August 29, 2008. All speeches available at www.stm.dk.

⁵¹ Rasmussen quoted in Farbøl, “Irakkrigen,” 77.

⁵² Ibid.

⁵³ Venstre, Udenrigspolitisk oplæg, 2006: www.venstre.dk .

⁵⁴ Nikolaj Petersen, “Kampen.” See also Claus Bjørn and Carsten Due-Nielsen, Fra helstat til nationalstat 1814–1914. Dansk Udenrigspolitiks historie 3 (Copenhagen: Danmarks Nationalleksikon, 2003).

⁵⁵ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, En verden i forandring. Regeringens bud på nye prioriteter i Danmarks udenrigspolitik. June 2003, http://www.statensnet.dk/pligtarkiv/fremvis.pl?vaerkid=24193&reprid=0&filid=9&iarkiv=1

⁵⁶ Per Hækkerup, Danmarks Udenrigspolitik (Copenhagen: AOF/Fremad, 1965).

⁵⁷ Heidi M. Rasmussen, “Fogh: Danmark må gøre op med småstatsmentaliteten,” Mandag Morgen, September 11, 2006.

⁵⁸ It should be noted that the idea of Denmark promoting ideological values and ‘making a difference’ was not a new invention in Danish foreign policy.

⁵⁹ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, En verden i forandring; and AFR, “Visioner.”

⁶⁰ Carsten Holbraad, Middle Powers in International Politics (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1984); Danish Neutrality: A Study in the Foreign Policy of a Small State (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).

⁶¹ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, En verden i forandring.

⁶² H.M. Rasmussen, “Fogh.”

⁶³ This position was repeated many times see for instance, DPP press release, “Dansk Folkeparti siger nej til, at regeringen anerkender Kosovo,” December 9, 2007: http://danskfolkeparti.dk/Dansk_Folkeparti_siger_nej_til_at_regeringen_anerkender_Kosovo

⁶⁴ See for instance Folketingets forhandlinger 1998-99 - B 4 BEH1 onsdag 7 oktober 1998, Tale 46 (KORT BEM), www.ft.dk.

⁶⁵ Ravid Rehling “NATO bombede kristendommen,” Information, September 21, 1999, http://www.information.dk/34944

⁶⁶ In the early 2000s, Søren Krarup was very enthusiastic about AFR and the promises of this alleged cultural war: see e.g., Søren Krarup, Systemskiftet. I kulturkampens tegn (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2006).

⁶⁷ Danish parliament, Folketingets forhandlinger, 2002-2003, March 18, 2003, www.ft.dk.

⁶⁸ Quoted from , http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/Når_krig_bliver_pligt_og_nødvendighed

⁶⁹ Farbøl Rosanna, "Kunsten at lægge historien til rette: Anders Fogh Rasmussen og opgøret med den danske udenrigspolitiske tradition," TEMP - tidsskrift for historie, (2012): 65–90.

⁷⁰ See Pedersen, Gør Din Pligt; “Socialdemokrater i opgør om fodnoter,” Berlingske Tidende, November 25, 2004; Hans Hækkerup, “Fodnotepolitikken gavnede ikke Danmark,” Jyllands-Posten, July 18, 2005, feature; “Forsvar for fodnoterne,” Jyllands-Posten, October 13, 2007.

⁷¹ Villy Søvndal, Speach at Aarhus Universitet, March 15, 2012, http://um.dk/da/om-os/ministrene/udenrigsministeren/taler-og-artikler/aarhus-universitet/ (accessed 11 December 2013)

⁷² Socialdemokraterne, Socialistisk Folkeparti og Det Radikale Venstre, En aktiv og ansvarlig udenrigspolitik, September 2011, www.socialdemokraterne.dk

⁷³ Danish Government, Et Danmark der står sammen. Regeringsgrundlag oktober 2011. www.stm.dk

⁷⁴ Kommissorium for undersøgelseskommission om den danske krigsdeltagelse i Irak og Afghanistan, Ministry of Justice, April 11, 2012, http://www.fmn.dk/videnom/Documents/Kommissorium_Irak_Afghanistan.pdf

⁷⁵ Ritzaus Bureau, “EL: Nu kommer Irak-løgnen frem i lyset,” Ritzaus Bureau, April 11, 2012, www.infomedia.dk.

⁷⁶ Ritzaus Bureau “Dommere: Irak-undersøgelse er for politisk,” Ritzaus Bureau, April 12, 2012.

⁷⁷ Olesen, “Truth on Demand.”

⁷⁸ Ibid. See also Thorsten Borring Olesen, “Noter og fodnoter. En diskussion af indenrigspolitikkens primat i efterkrigstidens danske udenrigspolitik,” in Nye fronter i Den kolde Krig, ed. C. Due-Nielsen, R. Mariager, and R. Schmidt (Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 2010), 87–113.

⁷⁹ Olesen, “Truth on Demand.”

⁸⁰ AFR, “60 året for 29. august 1943. Speech at Holmen on August 29, 2003; and “Visioner om Danmarks aktive Europapolitik,” speech at the University of Copenhagen on September 23, 2003, http://stm.dk/index.dsp?page=7990&action=page_overview_search&l1_valg=2385&l2_valg=-1