Norwegian Foreign Minister Urges Europe to Step Up on Defense While His Country Falls Behind Its Scandinavian Neighbors Both in Ukraine Aid and Military Spending

Photo: JAVAD PARSA/AFP
Copy

As Norway profits from gas sales, partly due to the war in Ukraine, its aid to Ukraine and investment in defense remain disproportionately low.

Following the scandalous February 28 meeting between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House, a wave of support for Ukraine surged in Norway. 

According to Karsten Friis, a researcher at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, the shocking conversation of February 28 across the Atlantic sparked voices supporting Ukraine and criticizing Trump.

After the meeting between Donald Trump and Volodymy Zelenskyy, international media picked up on the story of the Norwegian fuel company Haltbakk Bunker, which announced it would stop supplying fuel to U.S. Navy ships as a form of protest. Norwegian government representatives soon clarified that this was not official state policy. The decision was made on emotional grounds, and other similar companies will take over the supply of fuel for U.S. vessels, Friis summarized.

In Norway, too, in the wake of Trump’s drastic shift, discussions have been raised about how to strengthen Europe while continuing to support Ukraine, in order to prevent an unjust peace from being imposed.

Norway’s so-called sovereign wealth fund, which is separate from the state budget, is currently valued at an estimated €1.7 trillion and is popularly referred to as the "oil money." This fund could be used to increase defense spending as well as direct aid to Ukraine. The latter issue was ignited by Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter's editor-in-chief Peter Wolodarski and Danish newspaper Politiken's editor-in-chief Christian Jensen, who published an unusually sharp commentary in Norway’s largest daily, Aftenposten, questioning Norway’s efforts to help Ukraine while profiting from gas sales.

Economists have also joined in the criticism. Last Friday, Erna Solberg, leader of Norway’s largest opposition party, the Conservatives, and former prime minister, called for a more vigorous use of the sovereign wealth fund.

Since 2001, when the government was led by current Finance Minister and former NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, Norway has adhered to a three-percent spending cap, which limits the amount transferred from the fund to the state budget each year. Last month, Stoltenberg warned that breaking this budgetary rule, which has been in place for over two decades, would be a dangerous move.

Through the Nansen Program, initiated by Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, 135 billion Norwegian kroner (€11.5 billion) has been allocated to support Ukraine from 2023 until the end of the decade.

According to Friis, public frustration with the government has been justified. “The criticism has been growing. Norway profits from gas sales, while the share of aid to Ukraine as a percentage of GDP per capita remains low,” Friis noted to Estonian newspaper Postimees.

However, politicians are reluctant to allocate funds from the sovereign wealth fund because it is highly volatile. “The fund’s returns fluctuate with global stock markets and other factors. In 2023–2024, it reached record highs,” the researcher explained. “Politicians do not want to set a precedent by doing something unprecedented and withdrawing more money than usual.”

The primary concern is that this could be a slippery slope, leading to increased withdrawals in the future for purposes beyond supporting Ukraine (and indirectly, Norway’s own security).

“This is morally wrong because we are profiting from the war. But it is also strategically foolish because it is in our best interest to win this war as quickly as possible. The more money we pour in, the better,” Friis added. “Some argue that we should not spend money at the expense of future generations. But if this war is lost, there won’t be much left for those future generations to live on.”

“Trump's enthusiasm isn’t a bad thing—it’s good that he wants to end the war. However, the peace must be of high quality," Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide told in an interview to Estonian newspaper Postimees on March 4. "But the peace should be long-lasting, not just a frozen conflict," Eide added. "Simply achieving a ceasefire could be problematic. It could lead to a situation similar to the Korean Peninsula, where there is an armistice between the North and South, but no real peace.”

According to him Europe needs something broader and more realistic than Trump's plan. "And, of course, peace must align with fundamental legal principles such as sovereignty, freedom, and so on. We must also prevent a situation where Ukraine is pushed away from security guarantees, such as NATO membership,” says Eide.

A pro-Ukraine demonstration took place in front of the Oslo Parliament on Monday after the February 28 Oval Office scandalous meeting between the leaders of Ukraine and the United States of America.
A pro-Ukraine demonstration took place in front of the Oslo Parliament on Monday after the February 28 Oval Office scandalous meeting between the leaders of Ukraine and the United States of America. Photo: Margus Paaliste

Foreign Minister said they had received confirmation from both the Ukrainians and the Poles that the freeze on military aid is real and it is simply being used as leverage to pressure President Zelensky into signing a natural resources deal.

"We in Europe all now understand that we need to do more—but also better and in a more coordinated way. However, I don’t want to give the impression that we are replacing the United States, as that would be very difficult to do," Foreign Minister said.

Eide was reluctant, however, in addressing the possibility of using the so-called Oil Fund for Ukraine’s aid beyond what is available as the annual return on investment of the Fund. “For decades, Norway has been very careful to emphasize that we do not have an ordinary investment fund, as politicians might like to think. What we use is the annual return on investment. This can be allocated at a certain level and can be used for things like hospitals or, potentially, aiding Ukraine. We are already contributing significantly to Ukraine, alongside other Nordic countries,” Eide claimed.

Norway Falls Short in Both Defense Spending and Ukraine Aid

As of December 31, 2024, Norway has allocated just 0.7% of its GDP to bilateral aid for Ukraine since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion—the lowest percentage in Scandinavia. In comparison, Denmark (2.2%), Finland (1%), and Sweden (0.9%) have all contributed more. Norway also lags behind in defense spending, with only 2.16% of GDP projected for 2025, while Finland (2.5%), Denmark, and Sweden (both at 2.4%) are set to invest more in their military capabilities.

The full scale war in Ukraine led to a sharp reduction in Russian gas exports to Europe, prompting European countries to seek alternative suppliers. Norway, as Europe's second-largest gas supplier after Russia before the invasion, stepped in to fill the gap.

Copy

Terms

Top