USA:s strategiska intresse av Grönland : En teoriprövande fallstudie

Sammanfattning

How can the theoretical models of realism, liberal institutionalism and social constructivism explain the driving forces behind the United States strategic interest in Greenland? Previous research has primarily examined tensions between the United States and Greenland in terms of security policies, geopolitics, and in what ways larger states treat Greenland. Therefore, this paper aims to explain the driving forces behind U.S. actions through established theories such as realism, liberal institutionalism, and social constructivism. Based on a theory-testing design, the study uses the process tracing method to identify the causal mechanisms shaping United States behavior. The findings reveal three different theoretical explanations. Broadly speaking, the security-driven and great power rivalry ideas of realism are dominant in the case, followed by an identity-based social constructivist driving force, along with a weakly collaborative explanation by liberal institutionalism. Altogether, realism appears to receive the most empirical support in the case, followed by social constructivism that gives a valuable complementary approach, while liberal institutionalism provides inadequate explanatory ability. This study contributes to the field by applying a refined theory-testing design using a unique process tracing methodological framework. To continue this research, future studies could apply additional theoretical lenses to generate further insights into the case.