(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
It is completely legitimate by Jan Borgen (Ny Tid 21 October) to fight for the American embassy to be moved from Drammensveien to Husebyskogen. But it is not fair when he says that "SV representatives' position in practice means that the party puts the protection of a free area above the protection of other people's lives".
For me, human life is worth as much whether they live at Frogner or Huseby. To the extent that today the "terror threat hangs over many people" around today's US embassy in Drammensveien, it is not a solution to move this terror threat to the House forest. To an area where 20.000 cars pass the embassy site every day. Where 2.000 children train weekly in Njårdhallen, and who become the closest neighbor to the embassy. And where hundreds of kids walk past the embassy grounds on school roads and to and from friends.
That's real enough when Jan Borgen writes: “Have YOU thought about the risk of terrorist attacks? IT HAS BEEN POLICE. That's why they stand with loaded machine guns in Drammensveien ».
But Jan Borgen knows perfectly well that, of course, the police will stand with loaded machine guns also with an American embassy in Husebyskogen. The terror threat to the embassy is the same. Thousands of other children and young people will feel the same insecurity that Jan Borgen and his children feel today. Doesn't that worry Borgen?
In location issues, campaigns often appear based on the "Not In My Backyard" motivation. This may apply to substance abuse institutions, psychiatry – and embassies. As a city council member, I have to think holistically, whether the actions originate with neighbors in Huseby or Frogner.
It is desirable that the US embassy is moved from Drammensveien. And there is a united city government behind. But the premise must be that it is moved to a better alternative. The domestic forest does not satisfy this.
Ivar Johansen, city councilor in Oslo for SV.