Åsmund Weltzien

China’s Political Priorities in the Nordic Countries: from technology to core interests

Chinese policymakers have identified a number of priorities that motivate them to observe and interact with the Nordic countries. While one can assume that the Nordic countries appear far from frequently on China’s foreign policy agenda, they have unique competences and are open to increased engagement with China. Moreover, they are perceived as being easy to deal with and have become important partners in Beijing’s effort to forge closer ties with governments across the globe. This Policy Brief is based on the author’s report, China’s political priorities in the Nordic countries, published by FOI in 2014. The report focuses on China’s political priorities in the five Nordic countries during 2007-2013. It is based on an analysis of official statements, academic papers and reports from think-tanks, as well as interviews conducted with Chinese diplomats and Nordic officials and scholars in the Nordic capitals during the autumn of 2013. The author draws the conclusion that China’s overarching Nordicwide priorities include four main areas: to utilise the Nordic region as a sounding board and door opener; to acquire technology and know-how; to promote China’s core interests; and to improve perceptions of China.

Holding the borders, holding the centre: the EU and the refugee crisis

What has come to be called the ‘refugee crisis’ is the latest in a series of crises bedevilling the European Union – the four-fold monetary,budgetary, economic and financial ‘Euro-crisis’; a geopolitical security challenge posed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,the war in Syria and incursions into NATO airspace, and a looming Brexit, combined with the possible fragmentation of old EU member states like the United Kingdom and Spain. The ‘refugee crisis’ is the most serious of all. It encapsulates the EU’s failings and failures that other crises laid bare: the lack of long-term prevision and strategy, an overburdened decision-making system, and an outmoded conception of sovereignty. It goes to the very heart of the EU, for three reasons: Firstly, the cleavages it creates between member states add to those that have been dividing the EU since the early days of the Euro-crisis; secondly, the massive displacement of populations gives rise to complex problems, sparking controversies that weaken the social and political fabric of individual member states and feed into populism and enophobia; and, thirdly, the German Chancellor, who has played a crucial role in alleviating, if not solving, other crises, is facing domestic and European rebellions for her handling of the refugee issue. Will the agreement that the EU and Turkey concluded on 18 March 2016 manage to limit the influx of refugees, patch up differences, and re-establish Angela Merkel’s authority in Germany and in the Union?

Holding the borders, holding the centre: the EU and the refugee crisis

What has come to be called the ‘refugee crisis’ is the latest in a series of crises bedevilling the European Union – the four-fold monetary, budgetary, economic and financial ‘Euro-crisis’; a geopolitical security challenge posed by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the war in Syria and incursions into NATO airspace, and a looming Brexit, combined with the possible fragmentation of old EU member states like the United Kingdom and Spain. The ‘refugee crisis’ is the most serious of all. It encapsulates the EU’s failings and failures that other crises laid bare: the lack of long-term prevision and strategy, an overburdened decision-making system, and an outmoded conception of sovereignty. It goes to the very heart of the EU, for three reasons: Firstly, the cleavages it creates between member states add to those that have been dividing the EU since the early days of the Euro-crisis; secondly, the massive displacement of populations gives rise to complex problems, sparking controversies that weaken the social and political fabric of individual member states and feed into populism and xenophobia; and, thirdly, the German Chancellor, who has played a crucial role in alleviating, if not solving, other crises, is facing domestic and European rebellions for her handling of the refugee issue. Will the agreement that the EU and Turkey concluded on 18 March 2016 manage to limit the influx of refugees, patch up differences, and re-establish Angela Merkel’s authority in Germany and in the Union

Financial Plumbing for Big Beer

This policy brief departs from the idea of studying multinational corporations’ “global wealth chains” (Seabrooke and Wigan 2014a, 2014b). This can tell us how companies protect and create wealth by decentering their corporate forms in advantageous jurisdictions. The brief proposes a method for studying global wealth chains, despite the data limitations that constrain the field, and applies this method to Carlsberg A/S, which is a brewery operating across multiple jurisdictions.

The U.S. Presidential Election and its Implications on Middle East Policy

Preparing Civilian Experts to work in Vulnerable Places: Unveiling Brazil’s Potential

Nord Stream 2: policy dilemmas and the future of EU gas market

The Nord Stream 2 (NS2) gas pipeline project is one of the most controversial issues in EU gas-related debates today. Its proponents hold that the project is driven by purely commercial considerations, while opponents label it as political and contradictory to EU goals and rules. The project has also contributed to raising several questions concerning the role of commercial actors in the shaping and realization of the EU energy policy as well as the impact on EU internal cohesion and relations with Ukraine and Russia. Realization of NS2 may boost the role of Russian gas in the European energy mix, especially in northwestern Europe; however, it could also undermine the credibility of the common EU energy policy, which aims, at least formally, at diversification of supply routes and suppliers as a joint and coordinated response to the energy-security challenges faced by the EU as a whole and by its member states. This Policy Brief sheds light on the current state of the debate on this project and examines the possible short-, mid- and long-term implications.

Mispricing Argentine soybean exports

Reform, Renegotiation and Referendum

The UK stands on the brink of a momentous decision: whether to leave or remain in the European Union. Unlike all the other states that have sought late entry to the EU, the UK did not hold a referendum on whether to join in 1973: the decision was taken on the basis of a parliamentary vote. However, in 1975 voters were asked whether they wished to stay in the European Community, and a strong vote to remain was thought to have resolved the matter. However, in 2013, divisions within the Conservative Party led Prime Minister David Cameron to promise to engage in reform of the EU and to renegotiate the UK’s terms of membership before holding a referendum on whether to stay in. It was a high-risk, high-stakes proposition. Cameron must persuade his party, the British lectorate and his partners in the other EU member states of the merits of his case. The negotiation covers four areas of concern for the UK: economic governance, competitiveness, sovereignty, and immigration. To some British Eurosceptics, the emands seem woefully inadequate; to fellow EU leaders, they pose significant difficulties. The formal negotiations began in late 2015, after months of exploratory talks with the other member states, and are expected to be completed by the end of February, with the referendum coming as early as June 2016. While those who seek to leave the EU have been honing their arguments at least since the 1993 Maastricht Treaty, just that they envisage leaving the EU to look like is unclear. Brexit could take many forms, representing a journey to an unknown destination.