Navigating Relationships in Exile: Norway, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Small State Diplomacy in Second World War London

Abstract

This portfolio thesis maps the management of inter-state relationships by small power foreign policymakers in Second World War exile. German, Italian and Soviet aggression during the late 1930s and early 1940s forced eight European governments—including that of Norway, Czechoslovakia, and Poland—to continue the struggle for the survival of their states in exile. By mid-1941, they had settled in London, making it a unique diplomatic hub where politicians were socialising, collaborating, and learning about and from each other. Norway’s relationships with Czechoslovakia and Poland serve as a platform for analysis of this unprecedented historical episode. In exile, these relationships were reinforced by the physical proximity of political leaders and activists. While the Second World War is often studied as an apogee of internationalism, the historiography of the London-based governments-in-exile manifests a narrow, nationalist focus. By contrast, the present study zooms in on the political elites’ socialization and communication. More broadly, it underscores the value of diplomacy for the agency and legitimacy of small power representatives facing displacement and contestation of their mandate. The synthesis (kappa) presents the previous research on the Czechoslovak, Norwegian and Polish governments-in-exile and identifies both the need and the possibilities for a change in approach. It outlines the international society as the locus of inter-state relationships and exile as a condition defining them in Second World War London. Furthermore, charting Norway’s, Czechoslovakia’s, and Poland’s record in inter-war international society, it situates exile policy-makers’ international outlooks. Article 1 is a case study attesting to a swift change in Norway’s approach to recognition. The 1939 application from Slovakia, a Nazi Germany satellite, delivers an example of how the Norwegian foreign ministry coped with volatility. Its echoes revibrated in wartime exile, impeding the Czechoslovak exiles’ struggle for recognition as legitimate state representatives, preconditioning the resumption of the bilateral relations. Article 2 discusses the Czechoslovak, Norwegian, and Polish experiences in Second World War London, focusing on Norwegian perceptions of the Central European exiles. It displays how the governments’-in-exile collective identities formed the bedrock of socialization for state representation. Moreover, it shows how relationships with Czechoslovakia and Poland aided the refinement of Norwegian foreign policy-making. Article 3 zooms in on Norwegian efforts to generate awareness, reciprocity, and status. International publicity transmitted self-perceptions of identity, in-group and Inter-Allied relationships. It mediated the express turn of the Norwegian exile policy-makers towards a ‘realist’ comprehension of internationalism, mirroring the ongoing great power debates on international organization. Furthermore, it signalled the geography of Norway’s prospective partnerships within the emerging international order, including those with European small powers. Thus, wartime international publicity enriched Norway’s diplomatic toolkit and became the precursor of its post-war cultural diplomacy. This study demonstrates how and by what means Norwegian foreign policy-makers mastered and converted, respectively, the challenges and opportunities that came with the expanding diplomatic field. It proves Norway’s privileged position in Second World War London. Finally, it explicates how the participation of the small power governments-in-exile in negotiations over post-war security and international organization helped them retain international credibility, circumvent the asymmetry of power separating them from the superpowers, and manifest prowess for their domestic audiences.