Ulf Sverdrup
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Ulf Sverdrup was the Director of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) from 2011 to 2023.
Sverdrup led a government appointed commission on the long-term perspectives for the Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, and he was the Head of the Secretariat for the Official Norwegian Europe Review (NOU 2012:2.)
Sverdrup published extensively on various topics in international politics, with a particular emphasis on European affairs and Norwegian foreign policy.
Expertise
Education
2000 Dr. polit, Arena/Department of political science, University of Oslo
1993 Cand. polit, University of Bergen
Work Experience
2011-2023 Director, NUPI
2010-2011 Head of the Secretariat for the Official Norwegian Europe Review (NOU 2012:2)
2000-2011 Research professor at ARENA, Centre for European Studies, at the University of Oslo
2008-2010 Professor at BI
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersOljefondet og utenrikspolitikken: Gorillaen i rommet
Oljefondet reiser en rekke utenrikspolitiske spørsmål. Noen hevder at Oljefondet bør brukes som et virkemiddel for å fremme norske utenrikspolitiske interesser. Det er ikke mitt poeng. Jeg tror det er gode grunner å unngå en utvikling i den retning. Historien har vist at organiseringen av Oljefondet så langt har gitt gode resultater og det kan være risikabelt å gjøre en slik kobling. Samtidig mener jeg det er direkte uklokt, for både Oljefondet og utenrikspolitikken, å lukke øynene for de mange direkte, og indirekte, utenrikspolitiske funksjonene og virkningene som Oljefondet allerede i dag har og vil få i tiden fremover. Det er derfor på høy tid at vi undersøker nærmere hvordan og i hvilken grad Oljefondet og Norges finansielle investeringer former Norges internasjonale relasjoner, og på sikt også Norges interesser i utenrikspolitikken? Hvordan påvirker Oljefondet hvilke partnere, allianser og internasjonale grupperinger Norge inngår i, og hvordan påvirker Oljefondet Norges status og omdømme i det internasjonale samfunn? Med et stadig større Oljefond reises også spørsmålet om å sikre koherens mellom Oljefondets investeringer og andre sider ved den norske utenrikspolitikken. Selv om ikke Oljefondet skal være et virkemiddel for norsk utenrikspolitikk, bør vi kanskje snu om på forholdet, og, satt på spissen, spørre hvilken utenrikspolitikk Norge skal føre for å ivareta Oljefondets interesser. I denne artikkelen skal jeg bare kort belyse noen sider av forholdet mellom Oljefondet og norsk utenrikspolitikk. Tematikken er stor, og artikkelen er ingenlunde uttømmende, men jeg vil vise hvordan Oljefondet på ulike måter påvirker sentrale utenrikspolitiske størrelser, som Norges nasjonale interesser og posisjoner, ressurser, makt, allianser, forventninger, representasjon, status og koherens.
GOODGOV, or what Poland and Norway can do to improve European governance?
The seminar will present the main findings of the GoodGov Project - National and European Governance: Polish and Norwegian Cooperation Towards More Efficient Security, Energy and Migration Policies.
TTIP – implications and options for Norway
NUPI has, jointly with other research groups in Norway and abroad, analyzed the consequences for Norway of a free trade agreement between the EU and the USA (TTIP – Transatlantic Trade and Investment ...
Developments in the Russian Far East (RFE)
The project "Developments in the Russian Far East" looks at Russian decision-making and international engagement around development of Russia’s Pacific coast....
Morocco, challenges in the region and its cooperation with the EU
In this seminar, Mohammed Tawfik Mouline, wil give a presentation on Morocco’s major achievements at the political, economic and social levels.
Expert meeting: Europe, the EU and security
In connection with the Ministry of Foreign Affair’s project “Norwegian foreign and security policy – the options ahead”, which will lead to a white paper in spring 2017, NUPI is in cooperation with the MFA organizing a series of expert meetings on relevant topics during spring/early summer 2016. The main purpose of the meetings is to give academic input to the project.
Expert meeting: Fragile states
In connection with the Ministry of Foreign Affair’s project “Norwegian foreign and security policy – the options ahead”, which will lead to a white paper in spring 2017, NUPI is in cooperation with the MFA organizing a series of expert meetings on relevant topics during spring/early summer 2016. The main purpose of the meetings is to give academic input to the project.
På bålet - UK og folkeavstemmingen
Britene kan sette EU i brann med sin folkeavstemming.
“For Every Action...” The American pivot to Asia and fragmented European responses
In this two-part paper, Thomas Wright and Will Moreland respond to an assessment of Europe's reaction to the U.S. rebalance to Asia by Bjørnar Sverdrup-Thygeson, Marc Lanteigne, and Ulf Sverdrup of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs. Download the full report here for a complete set of recommendations and detailed analysis. In 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama declared an American strategic shift towards the Asia-Pacific—what would colloquially be known as the “pivot to Asia”—with the words “Here, we see the future.” For the American allies on the opposite end of the Eurasian continent, this announcement was a source of consternation. Was Europe to be left in the past? In the first part of this paper, Bjørnar Sverdrup-Thygeson, Marc Lanteigne, and Ulf Sverdrup of the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) consider Europe's response to the pivot. They note that while the U.S. pivot to Asia has been the catalyst for a European pivot, the response has not been coherent among European governments. Instead, they oscillate between four distinct Asia policy options based on: formal cooperation with the United States; coordination with Washington in which European "soft power" complements U.S. leadership; co-existence with an "independent" European position; or competition and radical political realignment. The first part concludes by arguing that European Union governments must decide whether to align, compete, or find some sort of middle path; the authors anticipate that a combination of the coordination and co-existence policy options will define any potential coherent European response. The authors caution that Europe cannot enter the Asian century on American terms and should thus instead capitalize on Europe's comparative advantages stemming from economic and "soft" power. In the second part of the paper, Thomas Wright and Will Moreland of Brookings respond. They disagree that Europe has been "left in the past" by the American pivot, stressing that there is little evidence that the pivot to Asia has resulted in the United States doing less on security in Europe than its European partners want it to do. They also warn of the potential repercussions of a prioritization of economic incentives over security interests in the region. As Chinese financial clout grows and Europe’s economic recovery continues to stagnate, there is the concern that the need for a good trade or investment deal with Beijing would outweigh the ambition to craft a collective EU commitment to maintaining the post-World War II order in Asia—a system from which both the United States and Europe have benefited in terms of security and economic prosperity. Finally, they look at the spectrum between the coordination and co-existence policy options using the example of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Wright and Moreland conclude with several general recommendations for transatlantic cooperation in Asia. For one, the United States should not expend its political capital in ultimately counterproductive efforts to remove all daylight between U.S. and European strategies in Asia. Such an approach would inevitably result in forcing Europe to choose between amiable Euro-American relations and its economic relations with China. The United States should also support reforms of existing international institutions. Although segments of the United States—most importantly in the U.S. Senate—would prefer rising powers simply conform to current norms and institutions, this approach is in dangerous ignorance of the realities of changing global power dynamics. Finally, to be effective, U.S. policy must focus more on sharing a strategy rather than sharing a burden.
Energy security in Northern Europe and the Baltic region
This roundtable seminar will discuss energy security in Northern Europe and the Balticum, the effects by the Ukraine conflict and how the new European Energy Union will impact energy security efforts.