Being a Small State: Discussion on the Role of Size

Conventional wisdom suggests that small states’ foreign policies are constrained in several ways. These may be confined to size, material resources, geopolitical positioning and limited participation in inter-state affairs. Yet, despite their diminutiveness, small Caribbean states appeared to have acted with surprising dynamism in seeking to promote and uphold relations with China in an unlikely period, the bipolar era. Drawing from official records of their interactions and other documentary sources, these states showed themselves to be quite willing to transcend their various limitations and become rather active participants on issues aligning with their interests in the international sphere. This paper examines how policy-making between the Caribbean region and China unfolded and why it evolved the way it did. It argues that acting through the more ideational context of the Cold War era, policymakers within the Caribbean region implemented strategies and policies premised on shared ideals of Third World solidarity to further relations with China. In embarking on this analysis, two main contributions are envisaged. First, the paper addresses the knowledge gap on small Caribbean states’ foreign policy decision-making vis-à-vis China in the Cold War era. Second, interrogating the dynamic provides a unique opportunity to challenge the received wisdom on small states’ foreign policy behavior in line with an emphasis on small states agency amidst internal and international constraints.

As a small and new EU member state Croatia had little to contribute to Brexit, which occurred just a few years after the country’s accession to the EU. Stemming from its size, its pre-existing relations with the UK and its drive to learn to operate within the EU, Croatia is no outlier in the literature on small states’ foreign policy. This paper analyses the behaviour of Croatia during Brexit and adds to the literature on small states. First, it analyses whether and to what extent Croatia opted for one or more of the following strategies: seeking shelter, hiding or hedging during the Brexit negotiations. Second, it examines the logics underpinning the aforementioned strategies (logic of consequences vs. logic of appropriateness). Third, it scrutinizes Brexit’s impact on the Europeanisation of Croatia’s foreign and defence policies and possible advancement or undermining of this Europeanisation process. We focus on both policy-uploading and policy-downloading dimensions of Europeanisation, thus contributing to the literature on Europeanisation. Our research is based on existing literature, second-hand sources such as official documents and statements, and the primary data collected through semi-structured interviews with eight persons who either shaped the Croatian foreign and defence policies or were well-informed about them.

Recent developments in the European Union have created new opportunities and challenges for small member states, increasing the demand from policy-makers and diplomats for coherent and accessible analyses of the conditions and potential strategies of small states in the EU. Unfortunately, the academic literature on small states in the EU appears both diverse and fragmented: there is no agreement on how we should define a small state, what similarities we would expect to find in their foreign policies, or how they influence international relations. However, if we are to understand the challenges and possibilities currently faced by small EU member states, we need to systematise what we already know and to identify what we need to know. This article makes a modest contribution towards this goal by answering three simple questions: What is a small state in the European Union? How can we explain the behaviour of small EU member states? How do small states influence the European Union?

This study examines the impact of the decision-making rules, procedures and practices of the European Union on the ability of small Member States to influence Treaty negotiation outcomes, and assesses the causality of this influence in Treaty-revision. Within Treatymaking processes, actor influence is here expected to vary according to the institutional preconditions, and small states are presumed to benefit from particular type of decisionmaking rules to the disadvantage of others. The fundamental aim of the study is therefore to investigate the conditions under which small state influence increases in European Union Treaty-negotiations. To explain this puzzle, a distinction is made between two types of Treaty-making processes, those of the Intergovernmental Conferences and the Convention, which allows for subsequent comparisons between the decision-making rules of unanimity and restricted consensus. In order to empirically test the underlying hypotheses, explicit units of observation are chosen from the IGCs of Amsterdam, Nice and 2003-04, and the Convention on the Future of the EU. In-depth comparisons are made between four small Member States – Belgium, Denmark, Finland and Ireland – and their de facto influence is process-traced through three substantial issues of the institutional reform: the composition of the Commission, the extension of qualified majority voting and the reform of Council Presidency. The empirical analysis focuses on both informal and formal levels of decisionmaking dynamics, and a further analytical distinction is made between bargaining and deliberation modes of conflict-resolution. Drawing initially on theories of rational choice institutionalism (RCI) and liberal intergovernmentalism (LI), the unanimity rule as applied in the IGCs is expected to strengthen the formal position of an individual small state by providing, respectively, a veto-right for each negotiator and promoting asymmetric interdependency. The empirical findings confirm the major underlying hypothesis concerning the correlation between the adopted decision-making rules and the small states’ impact on distributional outcomes in the EU Treaty-amending negotiations on the one hand, and the superiority of the unanimity rule for small states on the other. Yet, a couple of additional key success factors – other than can be explained exclusively along the conjectures of RCI or LI schools – are also identified in the study.

The article addresses Lithuania’s foreign policy vis-à-vis the Eastern Partnership programme in 2009-2014 from the perspective of small states’ abilities to influence decision making processes within the European Union. The author aims at revealing the puzzle of Lithuania’s marginal capacities of absolute power being disproportional to the output of its foreign policy towards implementation of the Eastern Partnership programme and hence utilising “smart state strategy” conceptualised by Anders Wivel. The novelty of the study rests on expansion of applying the smart state strategy towards the post-negotiation stage of the policy implementation. The article contributes to the debate over the applicability of the “smart state strategy” approach towards the Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union, by arguing that Lithuania’s foreign policy vis-à-vis the Eastern Partnership programme in 2009-2014 does indeed serve as an example of such behaviour, however recognising Lithuania’s initial shift from utilising “small state policy” to “smart state strategy”.

The foreign policy behavior of small states, which in today’s world comprise some sixty countries, is not prominently represented in academia. Studies associated with these states’ foreign policy tend to focus on their behavior in the international arena with a clear dominance of realist thoughts. Small states are often seen from a closed-box approach where the internal factors, leadership, and other domestic issues are given scant attention by scholars, leaving substantial and important gaps in the knowledge. This book which emerged from original and extensive research over five years, attempts to fill some of these gaps. The book is concerned with the foreign policy formulation and implementation of the small Caribbean state of Trinidad and Tobago, and without the claim of generalization, it is hoped that similar studies will encourage scholars to develop a wider theory about small states’ foreign policy behavior. The foreign policy process and the associated factors provide insights and help to develop an epistemic framework as to how the twin-island state behaved under objective and subjective constraints and more specifically, how the decision-makers choose their foreign policy preferences.

The foreign policy behavior of small states, which in today’s world comprise some sixty countries, is not prominently represented in academia. Studies associated with these states’ foreign policy tend to focus on their behavior in the international arena with a clear dominance of realist thoughts. Small states are often seen from a closed-box approach where the internal factors, leadership, and other domestic issues are given scant attention by scholars, leaving substantial and important gaps in the knowledge. This book which emerged from original and extensive research over five years, attempts to fill some of these gaps. The book is concerned with the foreign policy formulation and implementation of the small Caribbean state of Trinidad and Tobago, and without the claim of generalization, it is hoped that similar studies will encourage scholars to develop a wider theory about small states’ foreign policy behavior. The foreign policy process and the associated factors provide insights and help to develop an epistemic framework as to how the twin-island state behaved under objective and subjective constraints and more specifically, how the decision-makers choose their foreign policy preferences.

With a multicentric world forming and stratification of resource potential taking place, as well as with more small states in Europe and the world and emerging big multinationals here, small states receive more and more researchers’ attention: there appear papers analyzing activities of small states in Europe in the international arena in general and in international negotiations in particular. This article answers the following research question: What strategies and tactics allow small European states to strengthen their positions in negotiations (based on the case of the Benelux countries)? The strategies used by small countries in negotiations to compensate for limited resources is of scientific and practical interest as it can be applied by other states, namely Russia. Theoretically, the study is based on constructivist methodology as negotiation tactics effectively (re)formulate the issue, changing it through the use of a different context and/or lexical units, as well as on structural invariants of activity in negotiations. Discourse analysis and case study are used as research methods. The analysis identified the limitations that small European states, in particular the Benelux countries, face at each stage of international negotiations. The authors conclude that the types of behavior small European states demonstrate in international negotiations can be divided into those (1) aimed at increasing the “weight” of the state (e.g., interaction within international institutions, with NGOs and lobbies, organizing side events, etc.) and (2) focused on influencing the course of negotiations: tactics within the bargaining strategy (coalition-building, bargaining, etc.) and tactics based on persuasion ((re)framing, appealing to one’s own “example”, etc.). For small European countries, namely the Benelux countries, persuasion tactics are most typical, although other tactics are also used.

This paper defines and categorises the concept of ‘foreign policy specialisation,’ emphasizing its significance in small EU member states’ practices and its role as a source of power in international negotiations. It distinguishes specialisation proper from other forms of foreign policy prioritisation. Drawing on insights from various disciplines, small states’ strategic documents, and interviews with diplomats, we build our definition of foreign policy specialisation as a deliberate, enduring prioritisation of a region or topic in national foreign policy that is implemented through political, financial, and administrative adjustments. We then illustrate our definition with a case study of Czechia’s specialisation in the Eastern Partnership countries. With the focus on specialisation employing a specific definition, the paper frames three groups of research questions that future research can address to enhance the understanding of small states’ foreign policymaking and European foreign policy’s broader dynamics and outcomes.

Background: Small South Asian states like Nepal and Bhutan are between two dominant powers, India and China. Even though their geopolitical situations are similar, their foreign policy actions are very different. To figure out how small states survive and get around hegemonic and competitive subsystems, it's important to know about these differences. Analyzing how small states endure and negotiate hegemonic and competitive subsystems requires an understanding of these distinctions. Methods: This study adopts a qualitative research design and a systemic level of analysis. It utilizes ex post facto methodology to investigate historical and contemporary events in Nepal and Bhutan. Data is from secondary sources, including academic literature, policy documents, and official statements. The research uses Comparative analysis to identify patterns and divergences in strategic behaviour. Results: Nepal has demonstrated a dual strategy of soft balancing and occasional bandwagoning to maintain its autonomy and address regional pressures. Bhutan, on the other hand, has mostly used a consistent alliance and bandwagoning approach, especially when it comes to security and economic support from India. Both states, on the other hand, use multilateralism and identity-based strategies to show that they are independent in the world. Conclusion: The study finds that geopolitical location does not fully determine foreign policy strategies. Internal political dynamics, leadership choices, and historical contexts have a big impact on the different paths that small states with similar structural problems take. Novelty: This study compares two small states that are similar in many ways; small, landlocked and neighbor of India and China. It shows how internal factors and perceived threats affect foreign policy in ways that go beyond structural determinism.

Due to the complex voting and decision-making mechanisms of the EU, the size-factor has long been present within EU studies as a relevant and significant variable in explaining member states’ activism. Despite the aim of small states to achieve equal representation, there is a huge discrepancy between the power of big and small states within the EU. Therefore, the expected behavior of small states is different from that of the big ones. However, there are also significant differences in foreign policy activism within the group of small EU states and those are analysed in this article. In order to differentiate small states’ activism within EU foreign policy, the article explores the correlation between the scope and number of small states’ leadership initiatives in EU foreign policy and different quantitative criteria used to define these small states (population, total GDP, GDP per capita)

Conventional wisdom in international studies posits that small states are subordinate players, influenced by the hierarchy of international systems. Chapter 10 offers a close look at New Zealand’s proactive and pragmatic participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a case study of a small liberal state maneuvering its bilateral relations with the great powers. Contrary to conventional wisdom, Lin argues that New Zealand, as an exemplar of a small liberal state, has the power to influence China’s foreign policy, such as in the case of the ambitious BRI. He contends that, despite exercising its power and influence in the early stages, New Zealand should be cautious about its increasingly vulnerable position under the BRI, and the limits of free trade-focused bilateral relations with China.

Straipsnyje nagrinėjama, kaip tarptautinių santykių disciplina apibrėžia ir aiškina mažų valstybių problematiką. Išskiriant pagrindinius klausimus, formuluojama iki šiol mažų valstybių studijų lauke plačiai netaikyta poststruktūralistinė teorinė ir metodologinė prieiga, kreipianti dėmesį į mažumą, kaip šalies identiteto dimensiją, ir reikšmes, kuriomis buvimas maža valstybe yra formuluojamas, siejamas arba sietinas su saugumo bei užsienio politika. Pateikiama Lietuvos ir Naujosios Zelandijos atvejų analizė ir jų palyginimas pristatant pagrindines mažumą apibrėžiančias reikšmes, jų santykį su saugumo bei užsienio politika. Remiantis atlikta analize, pasiūlomi į studijų lauko plėtojimą referuojantys principai, kurie gali būti svarbūs toliau tiriant ir aiškinant mažas valstybes.

The role of small member states in EU foreign policy is increasingly being challenged, especially in view of the reforms being proposed to make the EU more effective as an international actor. These reforms, if adopted, will require the small Central and Eastern European member states, such as Bulgaria, to rethink their old foreign-policy strategies and practices. Instead of band-wagoning and balancing conflicting interests, these small member states will have to learn to be more proactive, to build their reputations and to form alliances if they want to continue to have any influence on EU foreign policy. These issues are discussed in the light of the EU sanctions adopted against Russia in the aftermath of the Ukrainian–Russian conflict of 2014.

With growing India-China competition, smaller South Asian states like Nepal and the Maldives are coming under increased pressure to realign their foreign economic and security policies. Traditionally tied to India, these states are now facing a more turbulent and competitive regional order, further aggravated by the growing interests of the United States and other extra-regional actors in South Asia. This chapter looks at the case studies of Nepal and the Maldives to evaluate how this regional competition is affecting their external economic, security, and strategic decisions. We focus our analysis on three factors shaping their foreign policy behavior, two structural and one domestic: a changing distribution of power in the region, less concentrated in India as the traditional hegemon; the growing incentives to foster economic interdependence and cooperation, especially through new regional institutions; and the increasing political salience of foreign policy amid democratic transitions and partisan competition. Our insights into how Nepal and the Maldives are managing both external and internal pressures contribute to the comparative understanding of how smaller states' domestic conditions affect their foreign policy choices in competitive regional orders.