Sundvollen. A week after the right-wing leader Erna Solberg's dream of forming a four-party government went into the sink, the two ruling parties, the Right and the Progress Party (Frp), on Monday 7. October presented Norway's new government platform.

In Chapter 8 of the 75 pages long document, "Political Platform – for a Government Started by the Right and the Progressive Party", it appears that the incumbent government is on a different line from the incandescent red-green.

- It is mainly the blue government's more uncritical attitudes towards NATO and military cooperation in the EU that will pull Norway in a more belligerent direction, Alexander Harang, leader of Norway's Peace League, explains to Ny Tid.

Among other things, the new government platform states:

"Norwegian involvement and contribution to NATO must be strengthened and NATO activity and presence in Norway must be facilitated."

In addition: «« The Government will develop a strong and modern defense with the ability to solve national tasks and contribute effectively in allied and international cooperation for security and peace (…) ensure that Norway has a real threshold defense with robust and flexible operational departments that can deal with changing challenges in light of the current threat picture. ”

A concerned Harang states:

- When it comes to Norwegian war participation, the new government platform has an interesting wording that Norwegian participation in UN and NATO operations will contribute to security and peace in Norway and internationally. If that means strengthening the country's security if Norway is to embark on new NATO warships, then this is something entirely new in Norwegian politics, Harang points out. He cites the example of Libya:

- When Norway attacked Libya under NATO in 2011, there was no doubt that the security of the Norwegians was weakened as a direct consequence of the aggression. No party to the Storting has used this argument to prevent Norway from going to war in Libya. Although, of course, it is not explicit in the government statement that Norway should increase its war participation, it is not unlikely that this is the consequence of the policy being presented, says Harang.

The red-green government was met with much criticism from its own when the Norwegian decision to go to war was decided in March 2011. The only people who applauded were the opposition, which according to the then Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre (Labor Party) supported the decision in unison.

Disturbing war policy

Harang points out that the new government shows far greater NATO loyalty than the red-greens.

- The blue ones will be pressured to contribute to international war operations to a greater extent than their predecessors. The same applies in relation to the EU's military involvement, says the leader of the Peace Council.

For a long time, Norway has been an active facilitator and mediator in several international conflicts. But the image of Norway as a nation of peace has during the 2000s begun to crack, Harang points out. He believes that in recent years Norway has had a war policy that has reduced Norwegian security. But Norway today is not, according to Harang, in a situation where it is necessary to increase the country's war participation.

- We have to get out of this rut. The war operations Norway has participated in in the 2000s, such as Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, have not made Norway a safer country. On the other hand, I would argue that the whole thing has made Norway far less secure, as NATO has in practice gone from being a defense pact to an attack pact. With the new government's line, Norway will not be able to say no to contributing to similar NATO operations when the United States asks, Harang tells Ny Tid.

Harang believes that Norway should distance itself from NATO. He believes that Norway should rather develop an independent security policy in co-operation with Nordic neighbors, as the EU's military co-operation develops – like NATO – in a negative direction.

- The fact that the blue government declaration proposes that Norway should take a more active part in this war policy is worrying. Another question is whether Norway will lose out on being less loyal to NATO's and the EU's military policy. At the moment, it does not look like that, he says.

Many NATO countries chose to distance themselves from the war in Libya and did not contribute in either Iraq or Afghanistan, such as Norway. The political costs of making their own choices in these cases have subsequently proved to be not very large, Harang points out.

- This also indicates that Norway can survive as a NATO member, even if we were to adopt a far more NATO-critical attitude than today, Harang emphasizes.

Deterioration of peace policy

But it is not only Norway's war policy that he believes has gone in the wrong direction in the 2000s. Another point in the new government platform that worries Harang is the following wording:

"The government will contribute to maintaining and further developing an internationally competitive Norwegian defense industry." Admittedly, the defense and weapons industry at both Raufoss and Kongsberg has grown sharply also during the red-greens in recent years. But:
Corresponding explicit support for the arms industry is not found in the Soria Moria declarations. In terms of peace policy, this is a clear deterioration, Harang emphasizes.

The red-green government has supported the arms industry, by increasing support for technology development and facilitating increased arms exports. This is stated, among other things, in Report to the Storting 38 (2006-2007). It also states that in order to strengthen the arms industry, Norway will increase subsidies and expand support schemes. But Harang points out:

- The red-greens have also mentioned many limiting elements for the arms industry in their government declarations – especially with regard to restrictions on arms exports, which the incoming government's declaration does not mention at all, he points out.

Will change Right

The big question Harang asks himself is how far away from the current situation we actually get with a blue government.

- The Conservatives and the Liberal Party have for a long time seen themselves as defense friends to a greater extent than the red-greens. Within the Conservative Party, in particular, there are nevertheless oppositions to subsidizing arms production, and then to a greater extent than in the Labor Party. This has been particularly evident in the debates surrounding our repurchase policy, which obliges countries Norway imports weapons from buying Norwegian weapons, he explains. Harang has therefore not given up on changing the H-FRP government's policy:

- We have something to work with for the blue ones. Fredslaget's policy in this field is that we believe all subsidization of munitions production is undesirable. Rather, we must facilitate the conversion of military production to civilian production. Therefore, we are also opposed to government facilitation of increased arms exports.

Harang points out that Norway has doubled arms exports from 2005 to 2013.

- The arms industry is already overprotected and over-subsidized. There is no need to continue on this path. With the announced new policy, Norway will become an even more obedient NATO ally, which to a greater extent will follow the pipe of the great powers in new military operations. Our trust in the field of peace will thus be weakened internationally, Harang concludes. ■

- Important for the United States

The Conservatives and the Green Party want to make the Norwegian arms industry competitive. – Positive, says Kongsberggruppen, which makes missiles for the United States' new F-35 fighter jets.

BY TIKA SOFIA LEÓN

Growth. The incoming government's political platform states that it "will contribute to maintaining and further developing an internationally competitive Norwegian defense industry."

This message is well received by the state-owned Kongsberg Group (the company misspells the name as «Kongsberg Gruppen», editor's note).

- I understand the signals from the new government as a continuation of the current regime around the export of defense equipment. I'm translating the formulation in the political platform as a continuation of existing practice and perceives what is said as something positive. But it is important to remember that we operate internationally in a competitive market for defense equipment, and it is not possible to just decide on an increase, says communications director Ronny Lie.

firing: Kongsberggruppen's new NSM missile (New Naval Target Missile) was tested off the Norwegian coast in June 2013. PHOTO: DEFENCEINDUSTRYDAILY.COM

Kongsberggrunnen (formerly Kongsberg Våpenfabrikk) has Kongsberg Defense Systems as one of four pillars. This weapons manufacturer has 1700 employees and a turnover of four billion kroner annually, with production sites in Stjørdal, Kjeller, Halden, Tromsø and Ottawa in Canada.

New missiles

Among Kongsberg Defense Systems' prides are the Penguin rockets and the new NSM rocket "Naval Strike Missile".

The weapons manufacturer has offices in Algeria, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

- Norway is a small country, and our defense is largely based on security policy and defense technology cooperation with others.

There is broad political agreement on this. Therefore, it must be an ally, a partner, at the other end for an increase to be possible, Lie points out.

One of the most important projects the weapons factory at Kongsberg is working on now is a project related to Norway's purchase of 52 F-35 fighter jets.

- We are already making parts for the fuselage, including the tail rudder, but in addition we are working on developing an integrated missile – "Joint Strike Missile" – which will be integrated in the bomb room of the F-35 fighter jets. This is a very advanced missile system, which is at the forefront of international technology, and which helps to maintain combat capabilities. Weapon systems will be integrated into the aircraft and allow the aircraft to operate without appearing on a radar. This is a major important project for us, with an international perspective ahead. The weapon is very important for Norway because it provides the Armed Forces with important capacity and it represents a large export potential, says Lie Ny Tid.

- Why are projects of this type good for Norway?

- Norway has an interest in developing advanced defense systems that safeguard national interests in the best possible way, and there is broad agreement on the defense and the defense industry. In order to be competitive, the defense industry depends on developing the best in technology and offering the best solutions. Norway has for a number of years developed advanced defense solutions and is receiving international recognition for this. For Norway, this means that we must cultivate existing cutting-edge expertise and ensure the continuation of knowledge development within science and engineering in the best possible way. Our investment in innovation is important because it contributes to innovation and strengthening of the knowledge industry, which in turn provides industrial development, value creation and international positioning, says Lie.

In 2012, the Kongsberg Group had a total turnover of NOK 15,6 billion, including Kongsberg Maritime and Kongsberg Oil & Gas. The distribution between defense and civilian is about 50/50, the communications director can tell. Nammo's communications director, Sissel Solum, did not have time to answer Ny Tid's questions. ■

Not included in the polls

KrF denies that the blue government is on a more belligerent line, but admits that they did not discuss the matter with the Conservatives and the FRP during the polls.

BY TIKA SOFIA LEÓN

Rejects. Fredslaget believes that the Conservatives and the FRP's platform are more uncritical of NATO and the EU, which will pull Norway in a more warlike direction. This is announced by KrF's parliamentary representative Kjell Ingolf Ropstad to Ny Tid.

- There is no basis for claiming that Norway's war participation will be greater after the change of government than was the case under the red-green government, says Ropstad.

Ropstad also does not agree with the leader of the Peace Team that what is in the Conservative Party and the FRP's political platform, about Norway defense industry, will lead to an increase in the Norwegian war industry.

- The rules for Norwegian exports of weapons and other defense equipment have been adopted by a broad parliamentary majority and are fixed. The red-green government has emphasized securing the Norwegian defense industry's participation and deliveries in major weapons programs and allocated large sums for weapons development, says Ropstad.

This is confirmed by Hans Olav Syversen, deputy head of KrF, in a text message to Ny Tid:

"Our commitment internationally depends on needs and capacity, therefore it is impossible to decide in advance. The Norwegian defense industry is important, but we are also concerned that we – to the extent possible – are familiar with the end use of what is exported. "

Continuing commitment

- What would Norway's war policy have looked like, if you had chosen to enter government with H and Frp, Ropstad?


- KrF will continue its strong commitment to good control of arms exports and to international armaments control and disarmament. We will also actively promote Norwegian peace and reconciliation work. We do this regardless of the government situation. This commitment would of course also be reflected in the government's policy if KrF had gone into government, Ropstad says.

- Is the defense investment in the government platform in accordance with what you talked about in the polls before you signed the cooperation agreement?

- No significant guidelines were laid down for security and defense policy during the two weeks of surveys. The forthcoming government's formulations on this have been prepared after it became clear that KrF and the Liberal Party would not join the Solberg government, he says.

Due to the opening of the Storting, October 9, according to Frp's communications manager Ole Berget, no one in the party could comment on the wording on the weapons industry and war participation. ■

(This is an excerpt from Ny Tid's weekly magazine 11.10.2013. Read the whole thing by buying Ny Tid in newspaper retailers all over the country, or by subscribing to Ny Tid -click here. Subscribers receive previous editions free of charge as PDF.)