Ulf Bjereld - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Books by Ulf Bjereld

by Henrik Oscarsson, Maria Oskarson, Stina Bengtsson, Henrik Fernros, Elina Lindgren, B. Rothstein, Jesper Stromback, Oscar Westlund, Ulf Bjereld, Sverker Lindblad, and Sören Holmberg

Papers by Ulf Bjereld

The article analyses Sweden as a critic and as a mediator and bridge-builder on the international... more The article analyses Sweden as a critic and as a mediator and bridge-builder on the international arena since 1945. Some researchers have claimed that in the mid-1960s Sweden took on the role of critic at the expense of that of mediator. Was this true? Has Sweden's participation in international opinion-building had a negative effect on her usefulness as mediator or bridge-builder in international conflicts? And what role do the actions of a nation as critic play for the image of that state as an impartial mediator? First, the relevance of a mediator/bridge-builder's impartiality is discussed. Thereafter, Sweden as critic and mediator/bridge-builder since 1945 is presented. Sweden's actions in two concrete cases are focused on the Vietnam and Iran-Iraq wars. In both cases Sweden tried to combine the role of mediator and bridge-builder with that of critic. Finally, some general conclusions are formulated about the relationship between the role of critic and that of mediat...

International Review of Sociology, 2009

In what is called, with an almost worn-out word, a globalised world, individualisation and destab... more In what is called, with an almost worn-out word, a globalised world, individualisation and destabilisation seem to be the two most central traits in both politics and society, internationally as well as within nation states. Destabilisation and individualisation are rooted in the communicational revolution and the way in which this has changed the prerequisites for the exercise of power and identity formation in today’s world. The globalisation effects on different types of political power distributions are still under scrutiny (Aday and Livingstone 2008). Some researchers argue for a strengthening of democracy, while others have a much more negative view on the effects of globalisation (Held et al. 1999, Bentivegna 2006). Some state that since the depth of the communication revolution and the media situation tend to vary significantly in different contexts, it is impossible to generalise their relationship to democracy. Whether or not globalisation leads to structural and policy convergence is still at the centre of debate (Graber 2003, Brundin 2008). Theoretically, individualisation manifests itself on the international level as an ever-stronger position of human rights, at the expense of state sovereignty (Risse et al. 1999). Nationally, individualisation means, for example, an increased importance of the specific competencies of the individual in the labour market and a decreasing interest in collective political activities (Bjereld and Demker 2006, 2008). Internationally, destabilisation manifests itself as a loosening up of the sovereignty of the nation state, increased importance of different types of transnational networks and a weakened position of the state sovereignty-based international law (Berlin 2007, Brundin 2008). Nationally, destabilisation means a loosening-up of the class structures of the industrial society and of the traditional professional roles and cleavages that came with the national and industrial revolutions (Bjereld and Demker 2006, 2008). In an ever-abundant discourse on globalisation it is only rarely that one finds questioning of why and in what way the communicational revolution has contributed to an increased destabilisation and individualisation of politics and society. Also, there is still a lack of empirical research into the development of destabilisation and individualisation over time. In this special issue the articles try to formulate and test hypotheses about individualisation and destabilisation in politics and society. Our aim is to increase our understanding of the communicational revolution’s

Oxford Handbooks Online, 2016

This chapter examines the modern history of Sweden’s foreign policy and external relations throug... more This chapter examines the modern history of Sweden’s foreign policy and external relations through the lens of neutrality. Sweden’s commitment to neutrality has not meant that the country is passive in international arenas. To the contrary, neutrality has for decades dovetailed with “international activism” and the articulation of international law and collective action. The chapter describes the emergence of the Swedish policy of neutrality during the Cold War and the post-neutrality policy that has evolved since the collapse of the bipolar world order. It details the primary components of and main reasons for the somewhat overlapping yet otherwise different versions of Swedish foreign policy between the two periods.

Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 1985

Statsvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 2013