NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
  • Home
  • About us
  • News
  • Other News
    • Africa and Norway
    • Asia and Norway
    • Asylum
    • Breaking News
    • China and Norway
    • Corruption in Norway
    • Crimes
    • Defence
    • Diplomatic relations
    • Economics
    • Environment
    • Farming
    • Featured
    • Health
    • Killing
    • Media Freedom
    • Middle East and Norway
    • NATO and Norway
    • Nobel Peace Prize
    • Norwegian Aid
    • Norwegian American
    • Oil & Gas
    • Peace Talks
    • Politics
    • Racism in Norway
    • Religion
    • Royal House
    • Russia and Norway
    • Science
    • Sex scandal
    • Sports
    • Spy War
    • Srilanka and Norway
    • Svalbard
    • Taiwan and Norway
    • Terrorist
    • Travel
    • Video clips
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us
NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
  • Home
  • About us
  • News
  • Other News
    • Africa and Norway
    • Asia and Norway
    • Asylum
    • Breaking News
    • China and Norway
    • Corruption in Norway
    • Crimes
    • Defence
    • Diplomatic relations
    • Economics
    • Environment
    • Farming
    • Featured
    • Health
    • Killing
    • Media Freedom
    • Middle East and Norway
    • NATO and Norway
    • Nobel Peace Prize
    • Norwegian Aid
    • Norwegian American
    • Oil & Gas
    • Peace Talks
    • Politics
    • Racism in Norway
    • Religion
    • Royal House
    • Russia and Norway
    • Science
    • Sex scandal
    • Sports
    • Spy War
    • Srilanka and Norway
    • Svalbard
    • Taiwan and Norway
    • Terrorist
    • Travel
    • Video clips
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us
Monday, February 16, 2026
NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
  • Home
  • About us
  • News
  • Other News
    • Africa and Norway
    • Asia and Norway
    • Asylum
    • Breaking News
    • China and Norway
    • Corruption in Norway
    • Crimes
    • Defence
    • Diplomatic relations
    • Economics
    • Environment
    • Farming
    • Featured
    • Health
    • Killing
    • Media Freedom
    • Middle East and Norway
    • NATO and Norway
    • Nobel Peace Prize
    • Norwegian Aid
    • Norwegian American
    • Oil & Gas
    • Peace Talks
    • Politics
    • Racism in Norway
    • Religion
    • Royal House
    • Russia and Norway
    • Science
    • Sex scandal
    • Sports
    • Spy War
    • Srilanka and Norway
    • Svalbard
    • Taiwan and Norway
    • Terrorist
    • Travel
    • Video clips
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us
Copyright 2025- All Right Reserved Norway News
Science

Important for children’s health to maintain contact with dad after divorce

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 20, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

About 40 per cent of all Norwegian children experience the divorce of their parents before reaching the end of their teen years.

Although it used to be more common, divorce or separation still results in many fathers disappearing from their children’s lives – often more or less involuntarily.

One reason may be that the mother moves elsewhere, often to her childhood home. Sometimes the mother sabotages the father’s right of access. Or maybe dad doesn’t follow through on keeping in touch.

Children who grow up with their mother without being able to meet their father have a harder time and more often face challenges later in life. They may have lower self-esteem, perform poorly at school, or develop mental and physical health problems.
 (Illustration photo: Julia Tsokur / Shutterstock / NTB scanpix)

Divorce itself means little

A group of researchers in Bergen has followed 1225 teenagers for two years. About 20 per cent of these children and adolescents had experienced divorce.

The researchers found that the divorce itself had little significance for the teenagers.

But losing their close relationship with a parent had a strong impact on their health and self-esteem.

The researchers studied the effect that divorce had on the level of intimacy and confidence between teenagers and the non-residential parent. Then they examined whether reduced close contact with the father or mother had consequences for the teen’s health and self-esteem.

Maintaining relationship with father is key

“Trust and confidence in the relationship with both the mother and father is important for the child. But we find an especially strong effect when contact with the father is reduced.

“We found that lack of contact with their father can give children both mental and physical health problems,” says Professor Emeritus Eivind Meland, who led this study.

The researchers also observed that these children often develop lower self-esteem.

The 1225 schoolchildren were 11 to 13 years old.

The researchers observed that children who were able to maintain close emotional bonds with both parents had noticeably better health and fewer self-esteem problems.

The researchers describe this as a strong association.

“From a public health perspective, it’s important for the child’s health to maintain a trusting relationship between father and child, where they can talk in confidence with each other. Close ties with the father protects the child from negative health consequences”, says Meland, and adds:

“We were unable to examine the reasons for loss of contact or diminished communication quality. We are certainly aware that some fathers and mothers are unfit to care for their children.”

Loss of contact with dad after break-up

Frode Thuen is a family psychologist and professor at Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. He is also known as the relationship columnist in Aftenposten and has participated in the work on this study.

“After a break-up, many kids today are still losing a lot of contact with their dad. Fathers can’t prevent the mother from moving away to somewhere else within Norway. This is typically what happens when the father and child lose contact,” says Thuen.

The fact that a mother may choose to move to a completely different place with the child than where the father lives is itself often a source of conflict, according to Thuen.

“Disrupting the contact between father and child can cause the child to start functioning poorly in several realms. They develop poorer social skills, their mental health deteriorates and it can impact their school work,” he says.

“The child’s self-esteem is also often weakened if contact with the father is broken,” says Thuen. He adds that secure self-esteem is important in life.

Mother often given custody rights

Both Meland and Thuen are concerned that today’s child legislation does not stipulate that both parents should be able to care for the child after a divorce.

Today, the Children Act (§ 36) states that if the parents disagree about the child’s place of residence, the court must decide that the child stay with one of them.

Furthermore, the Act states (§ 37) that if the parents have joint parental responsibility, but the child lives with only one parent, then the non-resident parent cannot object to the resident parent making important decisions about the child, such as where the child should live.

“If the parents disagree about the care of the child and living arrangements, the court today can only require parents to implement shared living arrangements in exceptional circumstances,” says Thuen.

The family psychologist is also concerned that the law still does not adequately protect the non-custodial parent from child visitation sabotage, even though the law was revised on this point two years ago.

Like Meland, Thuen advocates amending the Norwegian Children Act. Both suggest that the changes would facilitate equal care for the child by father and mother after a divorce.

Thuen also points out that the current Children Act in Norway is not in line with how the European Court of Human Rights believes it should be practised. The EU Court holds that it is a human right for children to receive care and love from both of their biological parents.

Same findings in international studies

Research is also increasingly being done Internationally, on the relationships between parents and children following divorce or separation, and the consequences this event may have for a child.

A study done by researchers at Arizona State University concludes that children and adolescents who have experienced divorce with significant parental conflict clearly face more personal and social problems.

However, a few years after the divorce, it wasn’t the children who had experienced a lot of conflict who were struggling the most. Instead, it was the children who had had little contact with or support from their father following the divorce.

A study by researchers in Israel, in which they tried to summarize international research on the topic, concluded that children often do better psychologically and at school if they still had good contact with their father after divorce.

They also found that many children in divorced families want to have more contact with their father than they get. Children who live with both their father and mother or who see both parents weekly show more life satisfaction and feel they receive more love from their parents. The divorce has less impact on the lives of these children, the Israeli researchers conclude, reminding us that the “best interests of the child” must be the main principle in making decisions after divorce or separation.

Danish recommendations for fathers and children

In Denmark, the Center for Børneliv (Center for children’s lives) has done a scientific review on available international and Danish research on fathers and children.

Researchers find that the father’s relationship with the mother is often decisive for how much he engages with his children. This applies both when the parents are together and once they have divorced.

It is crucial that mothers understand how important it is for children to maintain a close father-child relationship. Mothers must also understand that fathers need alone time with the children, in order to be able to have their own experiences caring for their child, according to the Danish recommendations.

The Danish research summary also states that children in shared living arrangements often do fine and almost as well as children in intact families. The researchers note that shared living schemes can create structure around the relationship, both for the children’s and parents’ lives.

At the same time, the Center for Børneliv emphasizes the importance of informing non-resident fathers about the importance of their involvement for their child’s well-being and development. Sometimes fathers need to have this explained to them. The children’s grandparents can play a role in this regard.

Finally, the Danish Center points out that fathers can benefit greatly from meeting other fathers who have more experience with being a father than they do. Especially in difficult situations, it can be helpful for a father to have a network around him.

Two caregivers important

Julie Ellesøe Jespersen works for the Center for Børneliv and led the Danish review article on fathers and children. She points out that children with single parents more often have psychological and physical health problems than children who alternate living with their mother and father.

Jespersen believes it is crucial for the child to have more than just one caregiver.

It isn’t crucial for the child that the second caregiver necessarily be the father. The second close caregiver could also be a grandparent or another person of the same sex as the mother or father.

According to a programme on Danish Radio, Jespersen has spent a good deal of time studying the research available on the topic.

As has a group of researchers at Yale University in the United States. The researchers here believe that the parent role has often been overshadowed by the role that we assume the mother must play in a child’s life. This has consequences when society intervenes in the lives of divorced families. The researchers advocate more innovative thinking.

Boys especially affected

At the Danish Rigshospitalet, Svend Aage Madsen led a research program on fathers and children. He names the same consequences of divorce and lost close contact as the researchers in Bergen do in their new study.

According to Madsen, interviewed on Danish Radio, boys are especially affected.

“If boys grow up without their father, they often have poor self-confidence and have a harder time establishing close relationships with others. These boys may also generally find it more difficult to manage their feelings,” he says.

The Danish researcher points out that previous research often focused on studying the mother-child relationship. Now more and more research is being done that also addresses the father-child relationship.

“We need less absolute certainty”

The debate about parental rights for children often brings up strong feelings.

But the research does not provide a basis for claiming that shared living is harmful to young children, that shared living is best for children, or that a shared living scheme reduces conflict. This is what Professor Agnes Andenæs, professor Odd Arne Tjersland and author and psychologist Peder Kjøs write in an article in Psykologtidsskriftet.

In the article, they argue that the academic justifications and political decisions should be presented with less absolute certainty.

The three researchers are also working to ensure that the current Children Act gives parents complete freedom to craft an agreement and requires them to find the arrangement that is best for their particular child.

References:

E. Meland et.al: ”Divorce and conversational difficulties with parents: Impact on adolescent health and self-esteem”. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, December 2019.

Kit K. Elam: “Non-Residential Father–Child Involvement, Interparental Conflict and Mental Health of Children Following Divorce: A Person-Focused Approach”, Journal of Youth and Adolescence, March 2016. Summary

M. Haimi and A. Lerner: “The Impact of Parental Separation and Divorce on the Health Status of Children, and the Ways to Improve it“, Journal of Clinical & Medical Genomics, 2016.

C. Panter-Brick et al: ” Practitioner review: Engaging fathers – recommendations for a game change in parenting interventions based on a systematic review of the global evidence “, Child Psychol Psychiatry, 2014.

Agnes Andenæs, Peder Kjøs and Odd Arne Tjersland · “Shared living – what does the research say?”, Psykologtidsskriftet, March 2017. (Article in norwegian)

———

This article was amended on Januar 9th at 15:02 to add the following quote from Eivind Meland: “We were unable to examine the reasons for loss of contact or diminished communication quality. We are certainly aware that some fathers and mothers are unfit to care for their children.”
A fact box was also added.

January 20, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Religion

Metropolitan Cleopas of Sweden will visit Oslo

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 19, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Metropolitan Cleopas of Sweden will be visiting Oslo in the coming days as part of the 15th Pastoral Visit to the Metropolitan Cathedral of the Annunciation.

The Metropolitan will arrive in Oslo on January 18 and in the evening will attend a concert with traditional music of the Norwegian choir “Arkadia” at the Metropolitan Cathedral of the Annunciation, in Oslo.

Afterwards he will have a meeting with the Ambassador of Greece to Norway, Maria Diamantis.

On Sunday, January 19, he will perform the Matins and the Archieratic Divine Liturgy at the Metropolitan Temple, and then he will cut the Vasilopita.

The Metropolitan of Sweden will leave Oslo in the afternoon of Sunday, January 19, after concluding his pastoral visits.

Source: Metropolis of Sweden

January 19, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Media Freedom

Zero children killed in traffic accidents in Norway in 2019

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 18, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

IF SAFETY IS your number one priority when traveling abroad, make sure to add Norway to your must-visit list. The Norwegian Public Roads Administration revealed on January 1, 2020, that no children between the age of zero and 15 were killed in traffic accidents in the whole of Norway in 2019. To add to this good piece of news, only one person was killed in traffic in the capital city of Oslo this past year.

These encouraging numbers are part of a trend 50 years in the making; in 1970, 101 children were killed on the roads in Norway, and in 1975, there were 41 traffic deaths in Oslo.

Regulations to limit driving in the city center and in residential areas, reduced speed limits, cycling lanes, and safer cycling and walking areas around schools are all contributing factors to the positive figures. 

There was a total of 110 traffic deaths throughout the rest of the country (population of 5.3 million) in 2019.

January 18, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
NATO and Norway

Denmark hands command of Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group One to Norway

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 17, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Oslo, Norway – In a ceremony held at the Akershus Fortress, in Oslo, Norway, command of Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group One (SNMCMG1) was transferred to Commander S.G. Henning Knudsen-Hauge of the Royal Norwegian Navy, on Wednesday, January 15, 2020. The outgoing commander, Denmarks’s Commander S.G. Peter Krogh, had commanded the group for a 12-month planned rotation which began in January, 2019.

Over the last twelve months, 16 ships have participated in SNMCMG1, patrolling the waters of Northern Europe.

SNMCMG1 ships provided NATO with a constant presence in the North to re-assure Allies and deter any potential aggressors; monitored NATO’s sea lanes contributing to maritime security; routinely trained with Allies and Partners, including participation in several large multinational exercises and numerous individual training opportunities, enhancing Allied interoperability.

Ceremony in Oslo was presided by Commodore Jeanette Morang, Commander Surface Forces NATO.

Quotes

“All the nations that contributed the 16 ships and personnel to Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group One over the last year have shown outstanding dedication to NATO’s mission in the North. The achievements over the last year speak highly for Denmark, Commander Peter Krogh and his team, to which we express our greatest appreciation. I look forward to working with Commander Henning Knudsen-Hauge, another highly capable officer who I am sure will continue the outstanding efforts in NATO’s mine countermeasures mission over the next six months.”     

—    Commodore Jeanette Morang, Commander Surface Forces NATO

“It has been a true pleasure both professionally and socially to Command the elite Mine Countermeasures forces of NATO. I have met nothing but open doors and willingness from key players to assist no matter which nation we visited or operation we conducted.  Thank you for the support and cooperation to all involved. I wish the best of luck to my successor and I am convinced he will appreciate his time as much as I have!” 

—    Commander S.G. Peter Krogh, Royal Danish Navy, Outgoing Commander of Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group One

“I’m humbled and proud to be able to assume command of SNMCMG1. As an officer who has spent my entire career in the MCM environment, this is the pinnacle of my career. My time in the MCM environment has confirmed my beliefs that the MCM community, both socially and professionally are a group of people working for the greater good. The MCM is truly multinational, and my time as Commander is a true testimony to this, with a multinational staff, with the majority from Norway, deploying aboard a German ship, and becoming one united crew, working for NATO and safe shipping. Time and time again, MCM proves that the slogan “We are NATO” is not just a slogan, but a description of our reality. I’m looking forward to the next 6 months, and I find myself humbled by the huge effort each serving member, ship and nation put into this ongoing effort.”

—    Commander S.G. Henning Knudsen-Hauge, Royal Norwegian Navy, Incoming Commander of Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group One Commander

Quick Facts

·       SNMCMG1 is one of four standing forces that comprise the maritime component of the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), which is part of the NATO Response Force (NRF). To respond to contingency situations additional forces can be added to these groups, with the NATO command staff onboard and the ships of the group as the nucleus, capable of providing timely support to NATO operations. 

·       Since January 2019, SNMCMG1 has had 16 ships participating from across the Alliance:

·       Commander S.G. Peter Krogh assumed Command of SNMCMG1 on January 14, 2019, and hoisted his flag on HDMS Thetis.

·       His command was supported by a total of 19 dedicated Danish staff members, 13 international staff members (from 9 different nations), and a number of flagship staff members who provided double-hatted support.

·       In 2019, the group carried our 7 Historic Ordnance Disposal (HOD) operations, destroying a total of 148 mines.

·       They spent 85 days looking for mines and searched over 210 square nautical miles.

January 17, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
NATO and Norway

‘Deep fake’ imagery manipulation poses threat to society not just military, U.S. warns

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 15, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

‘Deep fakes’ pose a major threat to elections and even world peace, Air Force Lt. Gen. John Shanahan, Director of Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, U.S. Department of Defense has warned.

“What if a senior leader was to come on and announce that the nation was at war, but it was a deep fake?,” he asked.

“It’s something I think a lot about because the level of realism and fidelity has vastly increased from just a year ago,” the Director of the US Joint Artificial Intelligence Center said.

“People have such a growing cynicism and scepticism about what they’re reading, seeing and hearing, that this could become such a corrosive effect over time that nobody knows what is reality anymore.

“Those are areas that are of increasing concern across the whole of society, not just the US military.”

“Within probably 30 minutes you can get online and start developing fairly high fidelity deep fakes,” he said.

The General also sought to provide reassure that as AI capability developed, the US military would not seek to develop autonomous “killer robots”.

“There are aspects of AI that feel different – the black box aspect of machine learning – but overall we have the process and policies in place to ensure that we [stick to] the laws of war, rules of engagement and proportionality.

“We will not violate those core principles.

“Humans will be held accountable. It will not be something that we say ‘the black box did it, no-one will be held accountable’. Just like in every mistake that has happened on a battlefield in our history, there will be accountability.

“We are not looking to go to this future of..killer robots: unsupervised, independent, self-targeting systems.

“Lethal, autonomous weapon systems, right now for the Department of Defence, is not something we are working actively towards.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Air Force Lt. Gen. John Shanahan, Director of Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, U.S. Department of Defense.

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I am Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan, the Director of the U.S. Department of Defense Joint Artificial Intelligence Center, also known as the JAIC, located in Washington, D.C.  I’m joined on the call by our Chief Technology Officer, Mr. Nand Mulchandani.  Nand joined our team last year after an impressive 25-plus-year career in Silicon Valley, where he founded, sold, and bought several tech startups and guided them to success.  He has exactly the kind of experience and technical expertise that is so important for a new government organization like the JAIC that is trying to adopt emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence.  

Nand’s invaluable insights and contributions to the JAIC and his presence with me on this trip underscore the importance of cooperation between the commercial technology sector and the military.  These partnerships are vital to the future of our shared values in this era of emerging and disruptive technologies.  In fact, more than ever before, our militaries are looking to the commercial sector to help us integrate AI-enabled capabilities that are safe, ethical, reliable, and aligned to our respect – with our respect for international law and human rights. 

This week we are meeting with NATO and European Union leaders to discuss how AI will transform our respective militaries in the coming years.  From the U.S. viewpoint, we see AI as a transformational technology, one that will help preserve the strategic military advantage that the United States and our allies and partners in NATO have enjoyed for more than 70 years.  In that respect, we recognize the value of AI for a wide range of capabilities across the full spectrum of the defense enterprise in a manner that is joint and interoperable with our allies and partners.

Europe, like the United States, thrives on a vast marketplace of ideas and freedom of expression.  We recognize that there are skeptics on both sides of the Atlantic concerning the military applications of AI.  As you might imagine, I have a pragmatic worldview on AI.  I compare AI to electricity or to computers.  Like electricity, AI is a transformative, general purpose technology.  AI is capable of being used for good or for bad, but is not a thing unto itself.  In essence, AI equates to machines that perform as well or better than humans in a variety of functions.  For the U.S. and our allies, our most valuable contributions will come from how we use AI to make better and faster decisions and optimize human-machine teaming.  

The U.S. envisions that as AI in its different fields such as machine learning and natural language processing mature, it will help commanders in the field make safer and more precise decisions during high consequence or mission critical operations.  We also believe that AI will help create a more streamlined organization for so-called back-office functions by reducing inefficiencies from manual, laborious operations, with the objective of simplifying workflows and improving the speed and accuracy of repetitive tasks.

We have a lot of work to do in the U.S. military in this regard.  Success with AI adoption requires a multi-generational commitment with the right combination of tactical urgency and strategic patience.  The U.S., along with our NATO allies, will face difficult decisions regarding the future of legacy systems and platforms in an era where technological innovations are transforming every aspect of the human experience.  We are entering a new era of global technological disruption, one that is fueled by data, software, AI, cyber, and cloud, with 5G soon to explode globally.  The pace of change is breathtaking.  With no end in sight to the speed or scope of change, the United States understands that we must embrace this technological transformation to meet future global security challenges.  

This is why the United States military is prioritizing the acceleration of AI adoption.  In fact, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper started – stated publicly that AI is his number one technology modernization priority.  Our response is spelled out in the U.S. administration’s American AI Initiative and the Department of Defense AI Strategy, the unclassified summary of which was released last February and is available online.  These are the documents that explicitly called for the creation of our Joint AI Center, which serves as the focal point for execution of our AI strategy.

Broadly, the JAIC has three major roles.  First, we are developing and delivering AI capabilities that make use of existing AI-enabled technologies from commercial industry and academia.  We have six AI projects underway, each of which represent areas where we know there is off-the-shelf AI technology that can be modified for Department of Defense missions.  These missions range from humanitarian assistance and disaster relief to aircraft predictive maintenance, cyber defense, warfighter health, intelligent business automation, and our priority project for the next year, joint warfighting.  With our mission initiatives, we’re looking for projects that can demonstrate initial return on investment in one to four years.  

Our second major role is working on the long-lead items or foundational building blocks that are preventing wider adoption of AI technology throughout the U.S. military – critical first steps, including building an enterprise cloud-enabled platform, human capital management, acquisition reform, and data management.  With its formal launch in 2020, the JAIC’s AI platform as a service, which we call the Joint Common Foundation, will lower the barriers to entry for AI developers and users throughout the Department of Defense.

Presently, much of the best commercial AI technology is being developed through open-source tools that demonstrate high performance but also contain significant cyber vulnerabilities.  We want AI developers to have easy access to these open-source tools, but given today’s ubiquitous cyber threat, we are taking steps to ensure cyber security is considered at every stage of the AI delivery lifecycle.  

Our third role is to serve as the DOD’s AI center of excellence, managing the DOD-wide governance process for AI to address areas such as acquisition reform as well as key policy questions, to include how we use AI-enabled capabilities safely, lawfully, and ethically.  Through the JAIC’s role in AI governance, we are diligently reviewing recommendations from organizations such as the United States Defense Innovation Board, an independent forum of subject matter experts from private industry and academia, along with the national – U.S. National Security Commission on AI, to adopt ethical standards and principles for AI adoption that are aligned with our nation’s values but still enable the United States and our allies to maintain a strategic military advantage through the use of AI-enabled technology.  

We are keenly aware that our strategic competitors are embracing this technological revolution and are moving very deliberately towards a future of artificial intelligence.  Many of the AI applications of both Russia and China run in stark contrast to the values of Europe and the United States, and raise serious questions regarding international norms, human rights, and preserving a free and open international order.  At the same time, we are concerned that some countries in Europe are at risk of becoming immobilized by debates about regulation and the ethics of the military use of AI.  We recognize that there are legitimate ethical concerns with any military technology, but we have crafted an approach that allows us to move forward in adopting the technology in parallel with addressing these ethics concerns.

Given the importance of the NATO alliance, we desire a future that enables digital-age cooperation and interoperability between the U.S. and NATO while respecting and honoring the strong commitment to safe, responsible, and ethical uses of technology.

From the U.S. viewpoint, the best way to preserve responsible and ethical values in AI military technology is to work alongside our allies and partners to provide global leadership in this consequential field.  And the stakes could not be higher for both the United States and NATO.  We are encouraging our allies to work with us to develop and implement strong AI principles for defense. 

Russia and China are cooperating on AI in ways that threaten our shared values and risk accelerating digital authoritarianism.  For example, China is utilizing AI technology to strengthen censorship over its people and stifle freedom of expression and human rights.  China is also facilitating the sale of AI-enabled autonomous weapons in the global arms market, lowering the barrier of entry of potential adversaries and potentially placing this technology in the hands of non-state actors.  Perhaps most concerning, Chinese technology companies, including Huawei, are compelled to cooperate with its Communist Party’s intelligence and security services no matter where the company operates.

Russia’s use of AI for national security has been characterized not so much by superior technology but by a greater willingness to disregard international ethical norms and to develop systems that pose destabilizing risks to international security.  Russia is also pursuing greater use of machine learning and automation for its global disinformation campaigns as well as lethal autonomous weapons systems.  

These security challenges and the technological innovations that are changing our world should compel likeminded nations to shape the future of the international order in the digital age, and vigorously promote AI for our shared values.  AI, like the major technology innovations of the past, has enormous potential to strengthen the NATO alliance.  The deliberate actions we take in the coming years with responsible AI adoption will ensure our militaries keep pace with digital modernization and remain interoperable in the most complex and consequential missions, so that we can continue to rely on the collective security architecture that has preserved peace, prosperity, and stability in Europe and beyond for decades.

Over the long term, as electricity and computers did for us in the past, I believe that AI technologies will set the stage for transforming the NATO alliance.  The future of our security and freedoms depends on it. 

Question:  What are the kind of safeguards that you think should be put in place to make sure that the technology that you are developing or commercial players are developing won’t end up in the hands of malicious actors or in the hands of countries, organizations where it’s not supposed to be?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  Well, I think Nand will want to talk on this as well.  Because this technology is coming largely from commercial industry in terms of how rapidly it’s being developed and fielded, we have serious concerns about non-state actors and their ability to grab these capabilities from the open-source market.  That is an area which we are beginning to place a lot more attention on to protect the technology not getting out into other non-state-actor hands for ill purposes.  

That’s not easy to do because it is so widely available.  And I can’t get into details in this forum, but we are taking steps to look very closely at how that technology could be exported to people that choose to use it for bad purposes.  But it is also difficult to do that given how easy it is to develop these technologies today.  

I think that’s what makes this different from a lot of technology in the past that was developed by the military and U.S. military allies and partners, and then you had commercial spinoffs.  In this case it’s almost the opposite, where it’s the commercial technologies have been developed first and then we’re repurposing those for military purposes.  But when you do that, those technologies will be available to almost anyone with not a lot of effort to go get them.  That risks a future which destabilizes the international order in the digital age, so I will tell you that we’re looking carefully about how we would prevent proliferation of those capabilities.  But I will not pretend that we can do that easily or immediately.

Mr. Mulchandani:  Just to add to what the General pointed out and get a little more – deeper into the tech, one thing that makes artificial intelligence algorithms and systems different is the need and presence for data for training.  And the algorithms and the toolsets are becoming widely available in an open-source model, which in today’s day and age, the democratization of and availability of these libraries and toolkits – we’re seeing that in crypto, we’re now seeing this in AI.  It’s very hard controlling that because, I mean, the world is flat when it comes to software and the proliferation of this.

However, the data – which is a key ingredient in building effective AI models to go do this – is something that every organization owns for themselves, and keeping the data, making sure that the data is curated properly, is stored properly, and controlling access to that is an incredibly important part of this data protection and AI protection systems that we’re putting in place.  But that’s actually a key piece that we need to make sure doesn’t get out there.

Question:  Will artificial intelligence also be practiced in targeted killings, as we experienced about a week ago?  And if it’s so, maybe you could define for me at least how could that be defensive and so, keeping peace?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  Yeah, so this is an important question.  Let me – let me state up front that that is not anything that we’re working on in the U.S. military right now.  Accountability is a principle that is first and foremost in any of our weapons technology throughout the history of the Department of Defense.  We go through a rigorous and disciplined process through test and evaluation, validation and verification, before we would ever field this.  That has been no different than any technology the department has developed in its history.  And there are aspects of artificial intelligence that feel different – the black box aspect, say, of machine learning.  

But overall, we have a process and policies in place to ensure that we have the laws of war, international humanitarian law, rules of engagement, the principles of proportionality and discrimination and so on, that we will not violate those core principles.  AI does not – does not change that.  Humans will be held accountable.  It will not be something that we say, “The black box did it – no one will be held accountable.”  Just like in every mishap or mistake that’s happened in a battlefield in our history, there will be accountability, and that is a core principle of how we’re developing these capabilities.  We are not looking to go to this future of what some would say is the worst-case assumption for the “Department of Killer Robots,” of, say, unsupervised, independent, self-targeting systems.  None of us are looking for that future.  We have a very disciplined approach to fielding those, beginning with lower consequence mission sets, taking the lessons and principles we learned from those lower consequence, less critical missions and beginning to apply them to warfighting operations.

So we – I don’t see the scenario as you described it being something that we’re working for.  We have safeguards in place to ensure that that outcome actually doesn’t happen the way that you talk about it.

Mr. Mulchandani:  I mean, the laws – the laws on our books are not changed by technology that easily, and AI is another one of these things where it needs to be absorbed into the frameworks and ethical rules and laws in society and what we have as a government.  So there’s nothing here we’re planning on that, and just to echo this point:  AI is a technology in its infancy, and part of it is every company and organization adopting it is adopting it in a sort of decision-support model for personalization.  I mean, think about where AI, this current sort of phase of AI has come from, is ad tech, right, which sort of pushed these sort of boundaries and has created the sort of movement here.  All of it is around personalization and support, which is really the projects and things that the General outlined in our opening statements.  Those are the projects that we’re working on to learn and absorb this into the mode of operation, which then leads us to more sophisticated use cases, but over time, in the careful way.

Question:  You mentioned the challenge posed by China and Huawei, at the same time saying you wanted to cooperate with NATO allies.  If a NATO ally like the UK went ahead with awarding a contract to Huawei for 5G, would that undermine that cooperation?  Would that – would that be a problem in sharing information, knowhow, skills with an ally?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I’ll be careful not to go outside of my qualified – well, my qualifications to answer that question, which is largely a policy question.  But let me just get to the broader point.  5G and AI will have a future that will be inextricably linked.  Whatever AI looks like today will advance even much faster as 5G becomes promulgated throughout the world.  What our concerns are is access to data – as Nand said earlier, if you have access to data, you basically have access to algorithms and can defeat the models – and then how is the data being shared, who is it being shared with.  

So I guess my starting point to answer that question would be if that were to happen in a theoretical case, we would have these discussions at a policy level as well as at a technical level to under – to really appreciate the full ramifications of having Huawei in a network anyplace in the world that was touching other allies and partners’ systems.  There are a lot of unknowns about this right now.  So what safeguards could be put in place if that were to happen?  And if there weren’t sufficient safeguards, what could we do to ensure that technology wasn’t stolen and given away to an adversary without even us understanding how it took place?

So I’ll answer that largely as a theoretical as opposed to this is about to happen, but these will be questions we will have to address at a policy level as well as the technical level to understand what might be the case if we’re developing artificial intelligence with a 5G backbone, and then what happens – what are the ramifications of that for all of the countries involved that may be touching that network.

Question:  You were talking earlier about the – your concern about the proliferation of some of these AI tools, and I wondered since AI is so broad and there are so many different types of applications, what do you see as having the biggest risk in the short term?  Is it, for instance, some of these tools that do predictive modeling, or surveillance tools, things like facial recognition, or some of the tools that can, for instance, mimic human voices or deep fakes, things like that?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I know Nand will want to also weigh in.  My answer is a couple of those – I think we’re all concerned, deeply concerned, right now about deep fakes.  It’s not an area a year ago I was thinking that much about as we stood up the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center.  It’s something I think a lot about now because the level of realism and fidelity is vastly increased over just a year ago, using capabilities such as generative adversarial networks to build these capabilities.  Now what do we – what do we develop a similar technology to defeat or at least to recognize when a deep fake is happening?  We’ve seen the corrosive influence of some of these disinformation campaigns against political election cycles.  What if a senior leader were to come on and announce that the nation is at war but it was a deep fake?  Those are areas that are of increasing concern across all of society, not just the United States military but they could be used anywhere across the world.  They’re not hard to get access to either.  I think within probably 30 minutes you can get online and start developing fairly high-fidelity – not perfect but high-fidelity deep fakes.  So that’s an area of concern.

Ubiquitous social surveillance, facial recognition is an area that we have a concern about, used by authoritarian regimes.  Again, it’s not the technology itself I’m worried about; it’s how the technology is being used.  So this aspect of what’s available and how quickly it can be used, and go back to what Mr. Mulchandani had said earlier:  It’s the data behind it that really matters more than just the algorithm itself.  The algorithm is becoming a commodity.  It’s how you train it against the data to develop a model, then the model is fielded, and then how is that model continuously updated based on new information.  That’s what matters the most.  

But in the near term, I do worry about the deep fake piece of this, and people have such a growing cynicism and skepticism of what they’re reading, seeing, and hearing that this could become such a corrosive effect over time that nobody knows what reality is anymore.  So we have to – we have to help develop tools, and there are a lot of big commercial industries as well as startups and DARPA in the United States that are working on how to detect deep fakes and counter them.  But those are the areas I’d say in the immediate term I’m worried about.

Mr. Mulchandani:  Yeah, and I would add just broader information operations, so deep fakes as a component of a concerted sort of effort.  But really going back to sort of our original point, the tools themselves are going to be open-source.  We – now, that’s actually somewhat asymmetrical in the sense that we do know that China, all the work that they do in terms of extending or moving those algorithms along, et cetera, we are not going to benefit from those because those don’t get published.  Our – in our society and academic and other institutions, most of the toolkits and work that’s been going on in AI gets published immediately and then gets democratized very, very quickly.  

So controlling that or trying to put a sort of framework around that, et cetera, is just not going to work.  I mean, that tech is out there.  So again, data protection, ensuring the accuracy and security of our data – there’s a lot, a lot of work that we’re doing around tests and eval, making sure that the models are performing correctly, but then using that stuff – if adversaries are using that for information operations, offensive operations on the cyber side is another big area of concern.  So that’s another set of things that we’ll be working on in terms of defensive technologies or being able to unravel or understand how these – countering many of these things is actually going to be a very active area of research but also development.

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  And before we go to the next question I just want to make another point on this idea of how this technology can be used.  The spotlight is on artificial intelligence right now for all the reasons that we live every day.  But I think more about how would I combine artificial intelligence and genetic engineering or bioengineering.  That actually worries me a lot more in terms of the combination of those together and the proliferation of capabilities, genetically modified or genetically engineered capabilities that promulgate much faster than anybody intended.  So it’s not one or the other.  How I use those together makes us think about a little bit of a dystopian future that we want to prevent to the max extent that we can.

Mr. Mulchandani:  Yeah, which is why ethics and policies and frameworks – we’re engaging in this discussion early on to make sure that we at least have the basis for policy and structure to guide these discussions as these new use cases pop up.  We really need to have inclusive frameworks to make sure all this can be handled.

Question:  I wanted to ask you regarding still some autonomous weapons systems.  As you know, for instance, the U.S. Navy is already operating autonomous working – what they call sub hunters, submarine hunting vessels, who can operate for several months autonomously on the sea.  How do you combine that kind of developments with the human responsibility all the time?  Because these developments are there; DARPA is very much invested in this.  Could you explain a little bit more on that issue?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I – first, most important starting point is to make the distinction between autonomous systems and AI-enabled autonomy.  They are two different things that tend to be conflated.  The Department of Defense has semiautonomous and, to some extent, autonomous systems, and some of these have been used for 30 years, and some element of autonomous systems – say, the guns on a ship, a Navy ship, that protect from close-in attack that can be operated in a semiautonomous – in some cases missile systems even autonomously for defensive purposes.  But now we start adding AI-enabled autonomy.  That is where the process by which we will go through test and evaluation, validation and verification, and applying our policy principles that the department has in place already.  Well before AI became – became sort of the hottest commodity on the market, we have a policy document on autonomy in weapons systems that governs this, and we will abide by that now as we apply the AI-enabled piece of this.

There is a tendency sometimes, and I say it’s an unfortunate tendency, for people who want to jump straight to this – and I know this is becoming a cliché, but “killer robots,” and I say these lethal autonomous weapons systems, which is right now for the Department of Defense not something that we’re working actively toward.  We are working towards autonomous systems and AI-enabled autonomy, but the idea of these sort of unsupervised, independent, self-targeting systems is a future which is not something that any commander I’ve ever worked with, worked for or been part of a command and organization myself is interested in, in sort of “killer robots” with self-agency roaming indiscriminately.  That’s not something we’re interested in.  We have humans that will be at some point in the loop, or on the loop, or outside the loop.  

These are the things that we’re working through right now, and the questions of the appropriate levels of human judgment are one phrase that we use in this policy world, but the other is meaningful human control.  Those are areas we’ll work through on some of these lower consequence mission use cases.  We’ll also do tabletop exercises and experiments in gaming to understand what are those principles and policies that we have to work our way through before we get to the point that you’re talking about, is fully autonomous systems that also have AI-enabled capabilities that might be weapons capabilities.  We are a long way from that.  We know that future could be there, so we’re working our way through all these other questions before we ever get to that point.

Mr. Mulchandani:  The Defense Innovation Board is a board of independent experts in the area that the Defense Department, 15 months ago they started on a project to come up with a set of broad principles that the DOD should abide by, and they’ve just released a report – again, available online, great read.  But it outlines five core principles that the Defense Department should abide by and consider as it’s building out its systems, and literally the first one is governance.  It’s about human oversight, human in the loop, and that is a principle that goes directly into all of the systems.  And the distinction that the General brought up between right now, one of the other points that the DIB report makes which very clearly says AI and autonomy are getting very, very confused right now.  A vast majority of the AI that’s being applied today is in machine learning, clustering algorithms, image recognition, decision support to make us better, faster or more accurate, but in no cases is it taking over the responsibility for any of the work that anyone does.  Even at commercial industry we wouldn’t be doing that.  That’s absolutely still the case here at the DOD.

Question:  Will we witness any kind of cooperation between Russia and China in this field ?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  We are seeing very clear evidence of Russia and China cooperation on artificial intelligence.  Like any two countries, they don’t necessarily have all the same interests so there will be differences in how they approach it.  There’ll be concerns by one country and the other.  But I do see, and we do see, just very clear evidence that they are working together in joint ventures, partnerships, artificial intelligence development of capabilities.  

So yes, we see that.  It’s concerning to us.  But we – the whole – one of the primary reasons we’re here this week is these discussions with NATO allies and partners, European Union, and the same conversations that we’ll have with our partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific is to ensure that we take an approach that abides by the same principles we have lived by as we’ve developed this technology for as long as we’ve had a Department of Defense around.

I think we actually have time for three more questions, if we can do that, and then we’ll wrap that up.

Question:   The White House recently released a statement saying that with regards to future – the future regulation of AI, “Europe should avoid heavy-handed innovation-killing models, and instead consider a similar regulatory approach” to the U.S.  What are the ramifications of the bloc adopting a tougher regulatory stance in AI, and don’t you think that a more stringent approach, regulatory approach, would help mitigate some of the security concerns regarding suppliers of equipment emanating from totalitarian regimes worldwide?   

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I think the most important starting point for the answer to that question is let’s separate the two things on security and supply chains, which is a problem that we are addressing, and it is a serious problem about everything from where the chips come through – come from and designed and developed and fielded, to how the data is produced, how the data is curated and stored, all the way to the security of physical weapons systems that might now have AI-enabled capabilities.  So there is a lot going on in not just the Department of Defense but across many countries on how to do better at protecting the physical aspects of a supply chain.

That I take – we look at that differently than we would on this other part of the regulations and frameworks behind it.  The White House recently released, within the last week, and some of you I’m sure have seen it, sort of the principles for AI for outside the United States Government, looking at regulatory and non-regulatory approaches.  Our starting point and the White House’s starting point is light-touch regulation wherever possible.  The last thing we want to do in this field of emerging technology moving as fast as it is, is to stifle innovation.  Over-regulating artificial intelligence is one way to stifle innovation and do it very quickly.

Now, we realize that self-regulation will not work everywhere all the time, so what are the – what are the right combinations of self-regulation, government-enforced regulation, and how do we work together as an alliance with NATO and with the European Union to find common ground?  I think just in the discussions we’ve had in the last two days, there are far more commonalities than there are differences, especially when we talk about principles of artificial intelligence and the ethical and safe lawful use of it.  So we’re careful on the regulation piece.  I think there is a grave danger of over-regulating and stifling innovation, but we also realize the technology is so immature and new that there are risks introduced by bringing these capabilities.  So what can we do to ensure that we minimize those risks, or mitigate those risks, turn the unknowns into the knowns, and then come up with a mitigation plan?

Question: What ethical assurances does the military have in order to champion and give private sector tech companies the confidence to work with DOD; a position seemingly at odds with many ethical demands of younger employees?

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  I’m particularly well-qualified to answer this, having led Project Maven for a couple of years.  And anybody who’s followed Project Maven understands the relationship with Google and what happened at the end of that, which so many lessons learned on both sides.  So there’s – so from our side, I think Google had as many lessons, if not more than we did, and this applies to any company we’re working with right now.  

This idea of trust and transparency – how much can we tell what we’re doing at the Department of Defense?  My finding, as I’ve been working this now for about three years: it’s a lack of understanding of what DOD is doing and why we’re doing it.  More often than not, there is an assumption about what the Department of Defense is doing, which is just wrong.  It’s inaccurate, because nobody’s ever explained what the department is doing.  We have to balance sort of our operational security and how much we reveal, but I think we can do that in ways that will make people more comfortable – never perfectly comfortable.  I think some people just don’t like the idea of military use of artificial intelligence.  As a dual or omni-use use technology, you will not keep it out of the military throughout the world.  This is just a classic case of a technology that starts in commercial industry and is going to promulgate, and rapidly, throughout military.  So how do we get it right?

So this idea of trust and transparency and explaining what we’re doing and why, that’s made a difference just in the last year the more we’ve been willing to talk about our approach to AI-enabled capabilities.  And also there is a little bit of a generational – at least in the United States – a lot of people have never worked with the United States military, have never known – truly have never known anybody that’s worn a uniform, and they don’t understand what the Department of Defense does.  They grew up in a commercial industry that is doing it for online sales.  They don’t know what we’re doing it for.

Mr. Mulchandani:  I mean, what the General mentioned is absolutely true, which is California and Washington, D.C., are on different sides of the coast.  They may as well be on different planets in the sense of just the level of work and contact that the two industries and organizations used to have has been very limited historically.  And there was this sort of throw-it-over-the-fence model where we threw technologies over and they just got used in this black box, and nobody knew what was going on.

The level of transparency that the DOD is now taking towards the working we’re doing around AI is astonishing.  I mean, Gen. Shanahan has been on the road explaining the work we’re doing – the ethics work, the input from industry, the level of contact that we have ongoing with industry.  The JAIC’s mission and work is almost entirely commercial.  We almost build no technology inside.  And having that contact and sustained contact and building trust and transparency takes time, but we’re seeing some incredibly great work with industry and it’s just going to get better.

So I think that’s the sort of the key piece, is the trust, transparency, building that out is going to be the basis for it.  And there are things that we’re going to be working on that we can’t discuss outside, et cetera, but rest assured, the contract with society is still the legal basis for the ethics work and everything that’s all out there.  And we’ll be enforcing that legally, but also just philosophically, that’s the way the department works.  So it’s been really refreshing after such a long career in tech to be on the other side of this and seeing how it is, and there are really not a lot of mysteries on this side.

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  And I’ve also found just doing this is having come up with a common vocabulary, what we say and what others hear are two different things sometimes.  So a taxonomy and an ontology of what we mean when we say – just artificial intelligence by itself brings a dozen different definitions very quickly.  So resetting the baseline so that we’re talking a common language is as important working with NATO and the European Union as it is anybody else.  So that’s a great starting point.

Question:  Very interesting that you mentioned the different AI projects that are already underway, and I wondered – you mentioned humanitarian aid, aircraft predictive maintenance, and I wondered which of the few that you mentioned you’re seeing the most progress on with applying AI.  And could you also talk a little bit about some of the companies you’re working with on those projects? 

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  We prefer not to get into which companies we’re working with, and that’s mainly to respect their preferences.  Some I’m more than happy to mention them, but if I mention one and don’t mention the others, I just – I’d prefer we stay away from that.

On the projects we’re working on right now, both on the humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, predictive maintenance, they’ve been – I’ve been impressed by the results, but they’re also sort of what I would call foundational results.  Just part of this is as we’ve built out this organization, getting muscle memory or getting reps at doing artificial intelligence projects, to get credibility and expertise so that we become known as the center of excellence for artificial intelligence, for fielding AI.  Very careful not to step into the great work that continues to go on in research and development through DARPA and the research labs, the national labs.  Wonderful work continues to go on.  I think we actually need more of it.  So this is about fielding.

But what we’ve learned on those other projects is I think it’s the art of the possible and what is feasible.  My experience with AI so far has been science fiction for most people because they’ve never seen it in action, and yet they use it on their personal electronic devices 100 times a day.  Just by showing – for the two examples on HADR is wildfire line/perimeter mapping.  Imagine the differences that can make in a fast-moving, unfolding crisis scenario where the current method of mapping a fire line is manual: acetate, back of a pickup truck, grease pencil and doing it that way.  And it takes potentially hours to get each subsequent update.  That is an archaic way of doing business – good as a backup but not where technology is.  So we’ve seen some very promising results in fire line/perimeter mapping as well as in flood – flood damage assessment, road obstruction analysis.  Some of these are commercial technologies available today, some are being a little bit repurposed for the purposes of what we were asking for, and some have been by our academic partners, which has been very helpful.

On predictive maintenance, again, starting with a narrow case of an H-60 helicopter in one of the services – in this case, the Special Operations Command – showing promising initial results to say this part is likely to fail in this many hours in the next number of flights.  Very good, encouraging, but still not good enough.  So what we’re doing is getting the building blocks, knowing that the whole world of AI, especially on these algorithms that we field, is dependent on continuous integration and continuous delivery.  They have to be updated faster and faster, which for the Department of Defense is a new way of doing business for the most part.  I came from a background in which we were doing block upgrades of big weapons systems in five-year increments that were so far behind by the time you fielded that essentially some parts of it were obsolete.  That won’t work in this environment.

So we’re trying to understand all the elements of the AI delivery pipeline from data reception to data curation, data management, data labeling, build an algorithm or a model off of an algorithm with data, test and evaluation, integrate it to weapons systems, and then on and on into continuous integration, continuous delivery.  Every step of that is relatively new for the Department of Defense – it’s brand new for many people, but what we’re doing is building those repetitions so we understand what it takes to do that in every other project.

So I actually feel very pleased by the results, limited as they are.  I will never be the person that overstates the results.  But what we’re learning from those will allow us to accelerate in all our other different projects that we’re going to take on over the course of the upcoming year of 2020, which I think I’ll be calling it the year of AI for DOD because I think we’re going to see – we’re going to see this happen faster and faster the better we get at it.

Mr. Mulchandani:  Yeah, and just to add to what the General pointed out is as a big believer in the sort of scaling curve or the innovation curve, where you end up starting slow and things don’t look like they’re breaking through, and then all of a sudden all the right conditions come through: the algorithms get tuned, the data lines up, the processing power kicks in, and then you end up with these sort of inflection points where these projects sort of get breakthroughs.  

So we’re seeing a very similar pattern here of where, for instance, when the JAIC started these two projects as the initial two projects that the JAIC started, progress was slow and it’s kind of moving along, but we’re now seeing commercial industry getting into certain verticals and areas where there was very slow progress to begin with, but the cycle times that we’re seeing the improvement are shortening dramatically.  And so AI as a market is very hard to characterize.  You can’t talk about it as a single market.  You have to pick literally an algorithm or a vertical by vertical and see where things scale.  And at the JAIC what we’re doing is really focused on areas where there’s a lot of promise, and making initial investments very much like a venture capital firm investing in a market, but then allowing commercial industry to sort of take over or build those solutions out to scale, and then being able to field them becomes a very, very interesting thing to move to.

So both of those markets we’re seeing that very encouraging, and in 2020 we feel that we’re going to get to scale in both of those spaces.

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  And I’ll close that out by saying my experience with Project Maven and where we are today in the JAIC, the reason Maven is now accelerating and about a two-year head start on the JAIC is because of user feedback.  Taking an initial product that is less than high-performing – and acknowledged that way by everybody, by the developers, by the people receiving it – but the feedback from the users and the operators is what is so critical to moving faster and faster and making that feedback part of the development lifecycle so then you have a better algorithm constantly fielded.  That – this idea of user feedback, that’s what we’re learning from our initial projects, and we’re getting better and better at that to the point where we start with that conversation with users on the very front end so that we don’t try to hand something to them a year down the road and they’ve never seen it before.  That is a recipe for disaster.

Mr. Mulchandani:  And these are best practices that we’re pulling from industry, the idea of good – great product management, specifying products up front with great detail, but then the whole DevOps movement that has really kicked into high gear in terms of iterating with the users and small functionality that gets actually pushed out in continuous increments, allows us to get to a level of speed that we didn’t have before.  And there’s a lot of changes going on at the DOD that are supporting this – cloud infrastructure, obviously things like JEDI, DevOps movement and adopting those practices in the way we build software has been – it’s really going to change the game not now but also in the future for the DOD.

Lt. Gen. Shanahan:  As I said, our reason for being out here this week is this is such an important dialogue to have right now within NATO but also with the European Union.  It’s an incredibly important technology.  It will change the character of how our militaries fight in the future.  But we have a long way to go, and starting with sort of a common framework of what’s an ethics-based discussion, what’s a human-centric approach to artificial intelligence – there is so much more in common than there are differences.  We like to focus initially on the areas of commonality and work our way through the differences.  

There are inevitable differences in how we approach everything from data regulation to protecting our data and intellectual property protection.  But this discussion is beginning, but it is just the start of what I think will be years-long, close collaboration and cooperation between NATO and the European Union as we work together on, I think, one of the most important technologies that we’ve seen in a long time.  It is just a technology; it’s an enabling technology.  It’s us – up to us to figure out how really that we use it to make it the most effective and efficient capabilities that we can put into our respective militaries and the rest of our respective governments.  

January 15, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Diplomatic relations

Scotland and Norway “natural partners”

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 15, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Scotland and Norway can work together to play a major role in tackling climate change, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon told Norwegian business leaders.

Addressing the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise conference in Oslo, the First Minister highlighted offshore wind and carbon capture and storage as sectors where the two countries are at the forefront of developing technologies.

She said she hoped the North Connect project – a 600km cable taking electricity between Scotland and Norway – would progress in the near future following positive analysis by both the UK and Norwegian regulators. And she identified digital health as an area where further co-operation could produce benefits for citizens and provide new business opportunities.

The First Minister said:

“Scotland and Norway are natural partners. We don’t simply share ties of history and geography but also common values and interests.

“That will remain true regardless of Brexit and Scotland’s future constitutional position. We are determined to work with the Norwegian Government and Norwegian businesses to strengthen our existing relationships.

“We both appreciate the importance and urgency of moving to a future based on net zero emissions. Our countries are home to two of the most ambitious carbon capture and storage proposals of their kind in the world, technology which shows how Norway and Scotland can play a major part in tackling climate change.”

She added: “Norway is a shining example of how small, northern European nations which are independent have been able to use their powers, not simply to improve the lives of their citizens at home but to play a constructive part on the world stage.”

Background

Norway is Scotland’s sixth largest trading partner with Scottish firms, exporting more than £1 billion in goods and services in 2017.

More than 100 Norwegian companies are established in Scotland, employing 5,870 people.

The Acorn Project at St Fergus in Aberdeenshire will seek to capture carbon dioxide from gas processing activities and use existing offshore pipelines to transport it to storage under the central North Sea.

The First Minister’s conference speech can be viewed online.

January 15, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Environment

Continued commitment on capture and storage of CO₂

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 13, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The government proposes to allocate a total of 628 million NOK for the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS).

The government has already spent large sums on research and development, demonstration and planning of the CCS full scale project. The budget proposal for 2020 includes continuation of the work with a full scale CO2 capture, transport and storage project, funds for operation of the Technology Centre at Mongstad (TCM) and for the research program Climit.

— CO2  capture and storage will be one of several necessary tools to reach the goals in the Paris Agreement. The government will continue to develop technology for CO2 capture, transport and storage and we have spent large funds on the development and planning of full scale projects. We propose to continue this effort in 2020, says Minister of Petroleum and Energy, Kjell-Børge Freiberg.

Oil refinery. Mongstad, Norway.

The effort to develop a full scale project for capture and storage of CO2 will continue. The government proposes to allocate 215 million NOK to the industry actor’s work with the project in 2020. This will facilitate the continuation of the project maturation.

The Government will consider realisation of the project once the front end engineering and design studies and the external quality assurance process has been completed. When assessing an investment decision, the government will evaluate the results from the front end engineering and design studies, the potential for benefit realization and the economic leeway.

The case will be presented to the Parliament. The government has stated that an investment decision can be made in 2020/2021. Both the government and the industry emphasize the importance of spending sufficient time planning the project. Sufficient planning is also advised by the external quality assurance.

— The Government has an ambition is to realise a cost effective solution for CCS in Norway, provided this results in technology development internationally. The proposed state budget facilitates the necessary progress towards an investment decisions, says minister Freiberg.

The state will decide whether to continue the operation of  TCM when a new participation agreement draft is available. The state wish for increased participation and financial support from the industry. There are ongoing negotiations between Gassnova and the industrial owners of TCM to land a new agreement for continued operation of TCM after the current participation agreement will expire in August 2020.

The government will continue to support research, development and demonstration of CCS technology through the CLIMIT program and the research centre for CCS at SINTEF in Trondheim.

Background:

While treating the RNB 2018 the parliament decided to give its consent to the government’s recommendation on continuing the planning of the full scale project until an investment decision in 2020/2021. The capture projects are taking place at Norcem and Fortum Oslo Varme (FOV), and Equinor cooperates with Shell and Total on the project for the transport and storage solution.

The estimated capital cost for  full scale CCS facilities and operational costs for five years is 11,2 billon NOK (Norcem) and 11,8 billion NOK (FOV).

The broad international set of actors involved in the Norwegian CCS project provide a good basis for international technology development and knowledge dissemination. The actors include Finnish Fortum, German Heidelberg, French Total and British/Dutch Shell, along with large Norwegian actors with international presence, like Equinor and Aker Solutions.

The current development schedule for the full scale project indicates an investment decision in 2020 aligned with the state budget for 2021. That is a very tight schedule. According to the external quality assessment a project schedule  aiming for an investment decision in 2020 seems to be thoroughly planned, however there is significant schedule risk. Nevertheless, the external quality assessor is of the opinion that the plan is executable and points out that it is an advantage that all actors are aware of the risk and that risk-reducing measures are being implemented. The government is therefore still aiming for an investment decision in 2020/2021.

January 13, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asylum

Bulgarian Sailors Disappeared in the Norwegian Sea

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 11, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Two Bulgarian sailors have fallen overboard the cargo ship Stara Planina, which is currently located in the Norwegian Sea.

Hours later, the Norwegian Coast Guard terminated the search operation for the two sailors because of the chances that the victims survived due to weather conditions in the area are close to zero, Navibulgar told Media.

The Stara Planina ship was taking a regular course when this morning a 9-meter wave pushed the two sailors overboard. The incident occurred in extremely severe weather conditions – winds exceeding 20 meters per second and stormy sea, said Alexander Kalchev, executive director of BMF: The relatives of the sailors have been notified of the incident.

The captain of the ship immediately signaled to the Norwegian Rescue Coordination Center. Helicopters were sent there immediately by the Naval Service. The ship itself was 65 miles offshore. Bypass activities continue.

“According to the Norwegian Joint Rescue Coordination Center, under the current climatic conditions there is no chance for those who have fallen into the water to survive for such a long time,” the ministry said in a statement.

A total of 19 people sailed aboard the Stara Planina cargo ship – 18 Bulgarian citizens and one Ukrainian, Media reported.

January 11, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Environment

Important milestone for CO₂ projects achieved

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 11, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Numerous countries have agreed on allowing export of CO₂ for the purpose of geological storage offshore under the “London Protocol”. The decision is an international breakthrough for capture, transport and storage of CO₂ (CCS) across borders and could possibly lead to a faster development of CCS as a climate technology.

On October 11th the parties to the London Protocol agreed on allowing temporary use of the changes to the protocol from 2009 which allow export of CO₂ for the purpose of storage offshore. The decision is an international breakthrough for capture, transport and transport of CO₂ across borders and could possibly lead to a faster development of CCS as a climate technology.

The proposal was submitted by the Netherlands and Norway in August and the United Kingdom endorsed it in October. The proposal got broad support during the meeting of the parties. Many parties pointed to the need for CCS to achieve the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. Sectors and industries that have few other options today to achieve big emission cuts were emphasized.

— This is a milestone in the work on full scale CCS in Norway. CCS cannot be imposed. We need to create this piece by piece, which this government has done. The possibility for CO₂ transport across borders is decisive for getting the Norwegian CO₂ storage site in the North Sea in place. Without global customers the tax payers would have to take the whole bill; a barrier that could stop the project. Being able to extend the full scale CCS project in accordance with international law gives the companies a completely different basis for the ambition on an infrastructure for transport and storage of CO₂ in the North Sea. This is an important condition for future financing models for CCS, says Minister of Petroleum and Energy, Kjell-Børge Freiberg.

— The  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has been clear on defining CCS as an important part of the solution to reach the climate goals in the Paris Agreement. The new agreement between the parties shows support for CCS as one of several necessary climate tools on the road to a low emission society in 2050. It is important to have an international framework that  contributes to the development of climate technology, says Minister of Climate and Environment, Ola Elvestuen.

Background:

The London Protocol is a global agreement which regulates dumping waste at sea. The amendment from 2009 that allows export of CO₂ for permanent storage purposes offshore will formally be implemented when 2/3 of the parties of the protocol have ratified it nationally. To date the protocol have 53 parties. Norway will continue to encourage the parties to the protocol to ratify the amendment so it can enter into force as soon as possible.

January 11, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
NATO and Norway

US is open to negotiating with Iran : Brian Hook

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 10, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The American administration is still open to negotiating a new deal with Iran despite imposing fresh sanctions today, a high-ranking US adviser told reporters on Friday.

Brian Hook, U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to Secretary of State, said, “We announced sanctions on Iran regime officials specifically eight Iranian leaders including Ali Shamkhani, who is the secretary of Supreme National Security Council.

“These eight have acted out Iran’s terror plots and campaigns of mayhem across the region. They are complicit in the recent murders of around 1,500 Iranians protesting their freedom,” Hook said during a telephonic press-briefing from the Brussels regional media hub.

He added, “Today we sanctioned 22 organisations and three vessels. These are vessels that have been operating in the iron, steel, aluminum, and copper sectors of Iran in related activities.”

He, however, said the US was open to negotiating a fresh deal with Iran.

“The US is ready to embrace peace with all who seek it. The President has said he is, again, opening the door to diplomacy. He would like to see a new deal to replace the Iran deal, so that we can resolve our differences with Iran diplomatically and we invite Iran to do the same and to not meet our diplomacy with military force,” Hook said.

Hook said that the US is going to continue to act defensively and commented, “The President exercises his inherent authority to act in self-defence when attacked. We will continue to do that.

“We continue to urge the Iranian regime to de-escalate, as other countries have, and to take the diplomatic offering that has been presented time and again by the United States, by Japan, by France, by so many countries around the world.”

Hook said, “The Iran nuclear deal, which is not only silent on ICBMs, weakened missile non-proliferation standards by ending the prohibition on Iran’s ballistic missile testing. And Iran took advantage of it.

“The Iran nuclear deal incentivised countries to look the other way on Iran’s non-nuclear threats to peace and security. It’s very important for nations around the understand that Iran’s missile programme needs to be countered. And we cannot allow the ballistic missile testing and the missile proliferation, which puts countries in the region at risk,” he added.

Hook added that if one took a look at the Iranian ‘corridor of control’, they have been proliferating missiles from Beirut to Sana’a.

“This is the Iranian Crescent that they have been trying to build. Much of those gains came during the time of the Iran nuclear deal and we are reversing the gains the regime has made under the deal and the pressure that we have put in place has no historic precedent.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Brian Hook, the U.S. Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of State.

Question: President Trump said he wanted a greater role for NATO in the Middle East. What specifically is the United States seeking? And what consensus-building efforts are underway to convince the UK, Germany, France, Russia, and China of the U.S. plan for dealing with Iran’s nuclear ambitions? He also asks what additional powerful sanctions will the U.S. impose on Iran?

Mr. Hook: The President yesterday spoke about NATO at length, and so I don’t have much to say beyond that. The President thinks that NATO should be expanded, and it should include the Middle East. And what we’re dealing with in the case – and it’s – this is an international problem. And so he does think that the scope of NATO should be increased.

And on Monday, at the beginning of this week, I addressed all of NATO and explained the defensive actions that we have taken to confront Iranian aggression, to defend ourselves against attacks, and to restore deterrence. And in the last couple of weeks, you have seen the President authorize defensive military strikes in Iraq and Syria. We managed the attack on our embassy in Baghdad by Iranian and other terrorists. And then you also had the elimination of Qasem Soleimani, also a defensive strike to prevent him from attacking hundreds of Americans – potentially hundreds of Americans in a large-scale attack.

So I would refer you — the President did speak at length about NATO yesterday, and I refer you to those remarks.

Question: Does the U.S. have any plans for using Cyprus as an operation base, not just for humanitarian reasons?

Mr. Hook: In terms of operations, it sounds like a DoD question, and not a diplomatic question, so I would refer you to DoD for an answer on that.

Moderator: Thanks for that answer. Our next question comes from Thomas Nehls with ARD Radio in Germany.

Question: I’m old enough to remember talks about a nuclear-free weapons zone in the Middle East. But then suddenly in the late ‘90s, it stopped. Is there any chance to get back to that issue, including the nuclear weapons being stationed in Israel, maybe even Pakistan and India. But that’s not the Middle East. So to that – asking about that issue, and if I may add, why isn’t it at all that populations should be more afraid of the non-existing nuclear weapons in Iran rather than of the existing nuclear weapons in Israel?

Mr. Hook: I don’t have any comment on anybody else’s policy on nonproliferation. I can only explain our policy on it. The Islamic Republic of Iran is the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism, and they are in the most volatile region in the world. Iran can never acquire a nuclear weapon. It would be catastrophic for the Middle East.

And if you think we have problems now keeping a lid on the region, imagine the Islamic Republic with a nuclear weapon. And so I’m not aware of anybody in the world that thinks it’s a good idea for Iran to have a nuclear weapon. And so your question about the nonexistent nuclear weapon, I think doesn’t fully appreciate the – this regime’s history of wanting to become a nuclear weapons state. And if anybody who has studied it would recognize this is not something that we can be glib about and to dismiss it as not a big deal.

The Israelis liberated a half a ton of materials from an armed warehouse in Tehran, and these are materials that demonstrate that the regime has kept the owner’s manual on how to build a nuclear weapon. And now that we’re outside of the Iran Nuclear Deal we’re in a much better position to deny Iran a nuclear weapon.

But it also allows us to then really forcibly respond to Iran’s regional aggression, and that’s what we’ve done with our sanctions. We have – this regime is facing its worst financial crisis and its worst political unrest in its 40-year history. And so the regime has very bad options right now. They are in a state of panicked aggression. And so we’re just in a much different place now. We’re very pleased with our policy which is the right nonproliferation policy to make the Middle East free of, the sort of the nuclear threats, that countries like Iran presents.

Question: can you explain to us exactly how it is the sanctions that you announced on the eight Iranian officials add to the prior sanctions that are already on some of them? For example, Shamkhani has already been sanctioned, so what is additional as a result of today’s action under 13876 ? Secondly, can you explain to us exactly what is additional in today’s sanctions on the metals industries, which at least steel and iron and I think also aluminum had previously been sanctioned?

Mr. Hook: The United States has many different authorities. Some of them come from Congress. Some of them derive from executive orders issued by the President. There are many different angles that we can take on this. Some may involve the nuclear dimension piece. Some may involve terrorism. Some may involve cyber, human rights abuses, missile counter-proliferation. We have a range of authorities.

We do not miss any opportunity to use these authorities when we can. And so you have seen this phenomenon of people being sanctioned more than once. It’s because we’re using different authorities that cover different threats, and that allows us to have a wraparound effect on these various individuals.

It’s also really important for us to go after Iran’s shock troops, the Basij, which have been murdering Iranians who have been fighting for their freedom and, in fact, would just like a normal government – a more representative government.

So when we do this it has a substantive effect, but it also signals to the Iranian people that we stand with them and their demands for a more representative government.

Question: Do you believe that Iran has actually concluded its retaliation? Or is there a risk that they might come back using their proxies?

Mr. Hook: Well, Iran has said – I think Foreign Minister Zarif, I think he used the word concluded. I don’t have the words in front of me. But it would seem that Iran has concluded its response in retaliation for the killing of Qasem Soleimani. That’s a question for Iran. I’m not speaking for them.

But we hope that Iran starts making better decisions and does not continue to pursue its aggressive and expansionist foreign policy either directly or through its proxies.

On September 11th of 2018, the White House issued a statement which was a new policy for the United States that we don’t make a distinction between the Iranian regime and its proxies. And Iran, the regime, will be held accountable for the attacks of its proxies. And you saw that after an American was killed by Kata’ib Hizballah on December 27th that the President then responded and struck command centers of Kata’ib Hizballah in Iraq and Syria. We’re going to continue to do that to act defensively. The President exercises his inherent authority to act in self-defense when attacked. He will continue to do that. But we continue to urge the Iranian regime to de-escalate, as other countries have, and to take the diplomatic off-ramp that has been presented time and again by the United States, by Japan, by France, by so many countries around the world.

Question: Firstly, Brian in your opening you mentioned that twenty-two entities and three vessels have been sanctioned. But the notice we received from the Treasury only mentioned twenty entities and one vessel. Can you explain the discrepancy there?

And then secondly, on the President’s assertion that Iran was targeting a U.S. embassy, you’ve said you’ve seen all the U.S. intel that led up to that point. That was the first we had heard about that. Can you explain where that threat came from and a little more about the nature of it?

Mr. Hook: So on the first question, I will defer to the Treasury official statement. And if there’s a variance of one or two on either side, please defer to Treasury on that.

On the—Qasem Soleimani was traveling in the region, and the IRGC confirmed it publicly – he was traveling in the region for the purpose of organizing attacks. And we have said that Qasem Soleimani was targeting diplomatic facilities and he was also targeting American service members. So he was looking at diplomats and he was looking at service members. Not the first time because he had orchestrated the attacks – repeated attacks on Iraqi military bases that were hosting American and coalition forces.

So this wasn’t the first time that he has done this. They have been – he has been organizing proxies in Iraq for some time. When we had him in the region planning imminent attacks against American – against American people and against American interests, the President then took decisive action.

If we had not taken that action and hundreds of people had died, you would be asking me now why didn’t we do more to prevent Qasem Soleimani from killing so many people. And so given his record, he was very effective and he was very lethal. And for those who have studied his 21-year history, he was Iran’s indispensable man because he was the glue that held together the proxy forces in the gray zone.

And so he has – himself is responsible for the murders of over 600 Americans. And when a man of that lethality and skill is in the region plotting attacks, and our intelligence was solid on this, the risks of doing nothing were much greater than the risks of eliminating him.

And it was the right decision. I was in Los Angeles the first part of this week. It’s the largest – Los Angeles is home to the largest Iranian diaspora in the world, and we received enormous support for the President’s foreign policy and for his decision to take Qasem Soleimani off the battlefield.

Question: Could you tell us, Bulgaria – Bulgaria is in the range of Iran’s missiles. Is there a real threat for the countries in our region? Is first. And secondly, can you please say more specific what is expected from the members of the area, such as Bulgaria, after the Trump statement? And of course, what is – in your opinion, what is the potential damage that the Iraqi people can endure in this – crucial situation now?

Mr. Hook: Well, what we have – let me start with Iraq. The Secretary did talk about Iraq today in his press conference – Secretary Mnuchin. So I would have you take a look at that.

Bulgaria, I don’t have anything specific to say about that. The Iranian regime has the largest missile inventory of any country in the Middle East, and they have been proliferating missiles and testing ballistic missiles for some time.

I have been saying for over a year and a half that the international community’s failure to get serious about Iran’s missile proliferation has been accumulating risk of a regional war. And the Iran Nuclear Deal, which is not only silent on ICBMs, weakened missile nonproliferation standards by ending the prohibition on Iran’s ballistic missile testing, and Iran took advantage of it. And the Iran Nuclear Deal incentivized countries to look the other way on Iran’s nonnuclear threats to peace and security.

And so it’s very important for nations around the world to understand that Iran’s missile program needs to be countered. And we cannot allow the ballistic missile testing and the missile proliferation, which puts countries in the region at risk.

I don’t have anything specific to say about Bulgaria, but we have seen – if you look at this Iranian corridor of control that they are trying to create, they have been proliferating missiles from Beirut to Sanaa. And this is the Iranian crescent that they have been trying to build. And we are – much of those gains came under – during the time of the Iran Nuclear Deal, and we are reversing – we are endeavoring to reverse the gains that the regime has made under the deal.

And the pressure that we have put in place has no historic precedent. The President and his national security Cabinet are very pleased with the strategy that we have been running now for almost three years, and we’re going to continue executing against that strategy.

Question: Ukrainian passenger plane crash in Iran and reports about it. Iran says reports that missile downed Ukrainian passenger plane is a big lie. American media has reported that Iran accidently shot down the plane. So what is the evidence that proves they brought ?

Mr. Hook: Today the Secretary of State said that it is likely that an Iranian missile is the cause of the crash of Ukraine International Airlines Flight PS-752. The State Department extends our deepest condolences to the families and the friends of the 176 passengers and crew who were killed in that tragic crash.

It is a tragedy. We hope the investigation is going to fully explain how this occurred. Secretary Mnuchin did make an announcement at the press conference I would refer you to. I would have you quote him and not me on this because I don’t – I want to be precise – I want him to be precise about it – that the United States would be granting exemptions to any individuals or entities needed to help facilitate the investigation. And I don’t have any further information to provide at this time on that.

We are in contact with our aviation partners. I did see that Lufthansa has canceled flights – all flights in and out of Iran. And so we’re in touch with – we’re monitoring developments related to the investigation.

We certainly hope that the regime does not do anything to hamper the investigation. This needs to be open, transparent, and comprehensive.

January 10, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Environment

CCS in Norway

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 10, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The government has an ambition to realise a cost effective solution for full scale carbon capture, transport and storage (CCS) in Norway, provided this will result in technology development internationally

The ambition has been followed through in pre-feasibility studies, feasibility studies and concept studies of a full scale CCS project. The aim is to capture CO₂  from different emission sources in Eastern Norway. The CO₂  will then be transported by ship to an onshore transport and storage terminal at Kollsnes on the Norwegian west coast. From the onshore terminal, CO₂  will be sent in pipeline to a safe  geological storage location under the sea bed, close to the Troll oil and gas field.

Fortum Oslo Varme is planning to capture CO₂ from flue gas from the waste to energy plant at Klemetsrud in Oslo. If proceeding, they will capture approximately 400 000 tonnes  of CO₂ per year. Norcem is planning to capture CO₂ from the cement factory flue gas at Brevik in Porsgrunn. If proceeding,  they will also capture approximately 400 000 tonnes of CO₂ per year.

Equinor is planning the CO₂ transport and storage solution for the full scale CCS project in cooperation with partners Shell and Total. They have named the transport and capture project Northern Lights. The CO₂ transport and storage solution is planned with excess capacity. This means that if the project is realised, other industrial emitters could capture and store their CO₂ without investing in the development of their own CO₂ storage solution. Equinor and the partners Shell and Total could transport and store the industrial CO₂ for a fee. Equinor has on behalf of the storage partners signed Memoranda of Understanding with several European industrial companies for the purpose of storing CO₂.

The last part in the project planning is front end engineering and design studies (FEED). When the FEED studies are completed and external quality assurance  has been performed, the government will assess whether a full scale project is to be realised in Norway. The government will make a final investment decision in 2020/2021.

(MFA-Norway)

January 10, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

South Sudan advised to end reliance on military force

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The United States, Britain and Norway jointly on Thursday advised South Sudan leaders to end reliance on military force in order to achieve a durable peace.

“Ending reliance on military force and creating political space for a diverse range of voices from all political parties, civil society, and the media is essential to creating a durable peace and an inclusive government that represents the interests of all parties to the agreement,” the three countries known as the Troika said in a statement.

President Kiir and opposition leaders missed the November 12 deadline, 2019 to form a unity government and agreed to give themselves another 100 days to address the key outstanding issues and then form the government by February 2020.

The outstanding issues include the creation of unified forces, deployment of forces meant to protect top officials, agreeing on the number of states and drawing internal boundaries.

The Troika said with less than six weeks remaining to meet the extended deadline to form a unity government, South Sudan’s leaders have a clear duty to their citizens to deliver.

“We welcome the recent meetings between leaders of key parties and their public commitment to form a government of national unity by the February deadline.  We urge all sides to build on this, to continue dialogue, and to ensure meaningful progress,” the group said.

The three countries called on the government to fund the peace process transparently, and urged all signatories to demonstrate measurable progress on the issues of states and boundaries and on the implementation of pre-transitional security arrangements. 

 The Troika group, which backs peace efforts in South Sudan, emphasized the need for South Sudan leaders’ recommitment to the inclusion of at least 35 percent of women in every level of government as decided by all the parties.

The people of South Sudan deserve a government that respects human rights and leaders who make necessary compromises for the greater good of the country, it said.

The three countries urged the signatories to peace deal to lay the foundations for the next steps of South Sudan’s peace process and political transition. 

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
NATO and Norway

Historic moment for the NATO Military Committee

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

On 6 January 2020, the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Air Chief Marshal Sir Stuart Peach officially welcomed Vice-Admiral Louise Dedichen as NATO Military Representative for Norway, and as the first woman to serve on the Committee.

Appointed in June 2019, Vice-Admiral Dedichen takes over from Vice Admiral Ketil Olsen as the NATO Military Representative for Norway. Welcoming the Admiral, the Chairman of the NATO Military Committee highlighted the historical significance of the appointment. “NATO and its Allies recognise the importance of a more gender-balanced military. Across the Alliance, we are seeing an upward trend and more women are being appointed to decision-making positions. More women in national high-level positions translates into more women in NATO military high-level positions. It is important to strengthen women’s voices everywhere – from our meetings to our missions”, emphasized Air Chief Marshal Peach.

Thanking the Chairman, Vice-Admiral Dedichen highlighted the great honour of being appointed to the NATO military committee. “It is essential in a large and powerful organisation like NATO to see the big picture. The world situation is not identical to everyone and so increasing the number of woman at NATO makes the Alliance stronger and better prepared to deal with the security challenges it faces”, she added.

Vice-Admiral Dedichen was also the first woman appointed Vice-Admiral and Commodore in the Norwegian Navy. For the last 12 years, she has been serving as the Commandant for the Norwegian Defence University College. Prior to this, she held a variety of positions such as Head of Section for Logistics, Public Relations Officer, Contract Negotiator and Teacher in Economics. This is not Vice-Admiral first foray into the NATO environment, from 1995–1998, she was the aide-de-camp to the then NATO Military Representative for Norway. 

Since its creation in October 1949, the Military Committee has been the most senior military authority in NATO and the essential link between the political decision-making process and the military structure. It is the primary source of consensus-based advice to the North Atlantic Council on military policy and strategy, and recommends measures considered necessary for the defence of the NATO area and the implementation of decisions regarding military operations. 

With each new accession, the Military Committee as grown to include representatives from each new nation. Today, all 29 Allied Nations have an equal voice at the table. The Republic of North Macedonia is also represented but under an observer status until its official accession.

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Crimes

Fire at Norway Airport Destroys Hundreds of Cars, Grounds Planes

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

A major fire in a parking garage at the Stavanger airport on Norway’s west coast destroyed as many as hundreds of cars, grounded air traffic and led to the evacuation of the facilities.

The fire started Tuesday afternoon and spread to several floors of the car park, but was partly contained by 9:30 p.m. local time, Norwegian news agency NTB reported, citing police. There were no reports of injuries from the fire on the outskirts of Stavanger, a city about 550 kilometers (340 miles) driving distance from the capital city of Oslo.

Fire fighters were still working to extinguish the fire in the evening, and there was a risk the building could collapse, NTB reported, citing emergency services.

Hundreds of cars were destroyed in the fire, according to local newspaper Stavanger Aftenblad. The car park in question has capacity for 3,000 cars and was nearly full when the fire started, according to broadcaster NRK.

The cause is unknown and under investigation but local police said they were notified at about 3:30 p.m. that an electric car was on fire in the parking garage. Norway has the most electric cars per capita in the world.

All flights from Sola, as the airport is known, were canceled for the rest of the day, Avinor, the government owned company that operates the airport, said on its website. It didn’t provide any details on when air traffic would resume, saying only passengers should check flight information on the website.

Norway’s Prime Minister Erna Solberg, who earlier in the day attended the official opening of the Johan Sverdrup oil field in the North Sea off the shore of Stavanger, said on Twitter her delegation was forced to change plans and drive back to Oslo, the capital, after the flight was canceled.

(bloomberg)

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Middle East and Norway

Norway’s Minister of Defence on the situation in Iraq

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Defence Minister Frank Bakke-Jensen’s comments after the attacks against two of the military camps of the anti-ISIL coalition in Iraq tonight:

We look very seriously at the attack on two of the coalition’s military camps in Iraq.

I am deeply concerned about the dramatic escalation we have seen in recent days. I urge all parties to help calm the situation and prevent it from escalating.

Norway has around 70 soldiers in Anbar, Iraq. There are no casualties. They are in good spirits, and have acted professionally in the demanding situation.

The safety of our personnel is our priority. Norway’s Armed Forces in Iraq monitor the situation closely and considers new measures as required. It is too early to say anything about this now.

We are in close dialogue with our coalition partners.

(MFA-NORWAY)

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

Attack On Nankana Sahib: 4-Member Delegation To Pakistan

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbhandhak Committee (SGPC), the apex body which manages Sikh shrines, will send a four-member delegation to Pakistan to take stock of the situation following a mob attack on Gurdwara Nankana Sahib.

Strongly condemning the mob attack on the historic Sikh shrine, SGPC chief Gobind Singh Longowal on Saturday appealed to the Pakistan government to take strict action against culprits.

“We strongly condemn the attack on Gurdwara Nankana Sahib in Pakistan and appeal to the Pakistan government to take stringent action against the culprits and also ensure safety of Sikhs living there,” Mr Longowal said on Saturday.

The delegation will also meet Pakistan’s Punjab Governor and Chief Minister (File)

“We will send a four-member delegation to Pakistan to take stock of the situation there,” he said, adding that the delegation would also meet Sikh families in Nankana Sahib.

“The delegation will also meet Pakistan’s Punjab Governor and Chief Minister,” he further said.

He said the delegation will comprise Rajinder Singh Mehta, Roop Singh, Surjit Singh and Rajinder Singh.

“We have spoken with the Gurdwara Nankana Sahib management committee…they told us the situation is normal now,” he said.

The SGPC chief said the sentiments of the Sikh community were hurt with the attack on Gurdwara Nankana Sahib.

Mr Longowal said that the SGPC would also take up this matter with the United Nations.

Punjab’s former chief minister Parkash Singh Badal also condemned the attack on Gurdwara Nankana Sahib.

“We request the Government of India to immediately take steps so that peace and harmony is restored,” he said.

A mob reportedly attacked Gurdwara Nankana Sahib where Sikhism founder Guru Nanak Dev was born.

Reports suggested that hundreds of angry residents at Nankana Sahib pelted the Sikh pilgrims with stones.

Punjab Chief Minister Amarinder Singh and the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) had on Friday expressed concern over the mob attack on the Nankana Sahib gurdwara.

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

After Nankana Sahib attack, Sikh man killed in Pakistan’s Peshawar

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 9, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

A 25-year-old Sikh man, identified as Ravinder Singh, has allegedly been murdered in Peshawar, Pakistan. However, the alleged killer has not been identified yet.

The victim’s body was found in the Chamkani Police Station area in Peshawar.

Ravinder Singh was the brother of a journalist, Harmeet Singh, Pakistan’s first Sikh journalist in electronic media. Originally from Shangla in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province, Ravinder Singh lived in Malaysia. He had travelled to Pakistan for his wedding and was in Peshawar for the shopping.

Condemning the “targeted killing” of minority Sikh community member in Peshawar, India called upon the Pakistan government on Sunday to apprehend and punish the accused.

“India calls upon the Government of Pakistan to stop prevaricating and take immediate action to apprehend and give exemplary punishment to the perpetrators of these heinous acts,” the MEA said.

The alleged killing of the Sikh community member comes close on the heels of a Muslim mob’s attack on a revered Sikh shrine in Nankana Sahib, the birthplace of Guru Nanak, which took place on Friday.

India had on Friday strongly condemned vandalism at the revered Gurdwara Nankana Sahib in Pakistan and called upon the neighbouring country to take immediate steps to ensure the safety and security of the Sikh community there.

Breaking his silence on the incident, Imran Khan said on Sunday that there is a “major difference between the condemnable Nankana incident and the ongoing attacks across India on Muslims and other minorities”.

“The former is against my vision and will find zero tolerance and protection from the government including police and judiciary (sic),” he tweeted.

BJP leaders pointed to the attack on Gurdwara Nankana Sahib to gather support for the new law on citizenship that the government says gives hope to migrants who fled religious persecution in Pakistan and two other nations.

“Persecution of minorities in Pakistan is for real. Do those opposed to CAA [the Citizenship Amendment Act] still need more proof?” tweeted Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri.

The Citizenship Amendment Act fast-tracks naturalisation for Pakistani, Afghan and Sikh illegal immigrants from six non-Muslim minority communities (including Sikhs and Hindus), who entered India on or before December 31, 2014.

Dozens have been killed in protests against the new law — most of them in Uttar Pradesh.

(indiatoday)

January 9, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Srilanka and Norway

Norwegian Ambassador meets Sri Lankan Defence Secretary

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 8, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Ambassador of Norway Trine Jøranli Eskedal made a call on the Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Maj. Gen. (Retd) Kamal Gunaratne today (08 January).

Welcoming the Ambassador and the Deputy Head of Mission in Sri Lanka, the Defence Secretary briefed them on the present situation and the development process of the country.

During the discussion Norwegian AmbassadorJøranli proposed to extend development assistance to Sri Lanka in areas such as disaster management and renewable energy development.

Sri Lankan Defence Secretary Maj. Gen. Gunaratne said that their assistance to fight against drugs would be appreciated.

Counsellor and the Deputy Head of Mission of the Norwegian Embassy Monika Svenskerud was also present at the occasion.

January 8, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Media Freedom

Democracy in Venezuela is not for Sale – USA

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 7, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Carrie Filipetti, Deputy assistant secretary for Cuba and Venezuela, responded on Tuesday to the MEDIA during a press teleconference that if the security forces of the president in dispute, Nicolás Maduro, came to arrest Juan Guaidó, the United States would respond with more actions than have already been imposed to date.

“Russians and the Cubans is that they are willing to sacrifice their own strength and their own power to go down with Maduro.  We’re frankly surprised, because when they look at the Maduro regime, there – it’s clear that there’s incompetence, it’s clear that there’s undemocratic principles, there’s dictatorship, there’s violence, there’s intimidation, there’s harassment, there’s human rights violations.  And the Cubans and the Russians have decided to throw their weight behind that, both in terms of financial support, but also in terms of surveillance support and military support when it comes to the Cuban regime.   So we are very focused on making sure that these two pillars of support for the Maduro regime are no longer able to sustain it” , Carrie Filipetti said to Media.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Carrie Filipetti, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Cuba and Venezuela for the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs.

DAS Filipetti:  Thank you very much, As you all know, this past Sunday, January 5th, saw the reelection of Juan Guaido as the President of the National Assembly and, therefore, a continuation of his interim presidency this year.  Following this vote, which has 100 deputies out of 167 voting for President Guaido, dozens of countries have come out in support of his reelection and rejecting the violent attempts of the Maduro regime to block this vote.  

But what happened on Sunday is actually two stories.  First, there’s the story of Guaido’s re-election on Sunday.  But second, there’s the story of the regime’s approach to elections writ large, and this is a key story because it’s the origin of this crisis in the first place.  For years now, we’ve seen the regime’s violence and desperation.  UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet has highlighted this in a series of reporting about the dire human rights situation in Venezuela with Maduro’s death squads being responsible for over 7,000 extrajudicial killings in a period of 18 months and with hundreds of political prisoners continuing to languish in Venezuelan prisons.

We’ve seen reporting on the manipulation of humanitarian aid, the theft of hundreds of millions of dollars from food programs, and the violence and intimidation used to buy – try to buy the votes of deputies in advance of Sunday’s elections – in some cases, offering hundreds of thousands of dollars for a single vote.  

But what’s important to remember is that these efforts failed.  Democracy in Venezuela is not for sale.  And the 100 deputies who came out to El Nacional proved that.  Principles cannot be bought, and when the regime realized this, they panicked.  And in their desperation, they called on the military to abandon its traditional purpose of defending and protecting the constitution, and instead prioritize partisanship over the people.  We have all seen the images of Guaido and other deputies trying to access the National Assembly building only to be illegally blocked by these military leaders.  

And this is where the story of the regime’s approach to elections comes in.  Elections under the Maduro regime are why we are in the political, economic, and humanitarian crisis we are in.  He stole the presidential elections of 2018, he attempted and failed to steal Sunday’s election.  But even the national guard’s guns could not stop democracy.  And it’s important to note that he will try to steal the upcoming National Assembly elections and any presidential elections that are determined.  

So this is why U.S. policy has supported a transitional government to oversee presidential elections because National Assembly elections in 2020 will not solve this crisis; only a presidential election will.  And this Sunday proved without a shadow of a doubt that Maduro is incapable of overseeing free and fair elections.  So free and fair presidential elections under a transitional government are not only the only way to stop the usurpation, they’re also the only way to stop the violence, the intimidation, the murder, the human rights violations.  And it’s not just a political issue; this is a moral one.  Maduro’s massive failure first to buy votes, and then to block the election with physical violence has galvanized the United States and the international community in support of the reelection of Guaido and securing an end to this crisis.

And I’ll just give one final note that’s very timely, given it’s now 9:30 on Tuesday.  Today the National Assembly plans to meet for its usual Tuesday session.  The Maduro regime showed its colors on Sunday and we fully expect, and are already seeing them begin to deploy, the same dictatorial, violent tactics they used on Sunday to keep the majority of democratically-elected deputies out of the building.  But 100 of the 167 deputies support Guaido – that is far beyond a quorum.  It is unconstitutional to prevent them from entering the building and it’s unconstitutional for them to host a meeting without a quorum.

The National Assembly is the last bastion of democracy in Venezuela, and we will continue to support it and President Guaido against the regime’s criminal and thuggish behavior.  As I’ve said, democracy can’t be bought and won’t intimidate the National Assembly.  Guaido proved that on Sunday, and we will continue to prove that today and everyday going forward until the end of this crisis.

Question:  Mrs. Secretary, the Venezuelan citizens in the last couple of days do this simple math: the United States got Soleimani out of the way because he was a threat to national security in the region and because he was the leader of violent repression against the populations in the countries around.  But United States want a specific and negotiated outcome in Venezuela while Maduro is killing his own people, has given passports and refuge to terrorists, has sent his chancellor to meet Hizballah’s general secretary in Lebanon, and he’s exploiting his violence to the rest of the region, destabilizing countries in your own front yard.  What would you tell them?

DAS Filipetti:  Thank you for that question.  So obviously, you’ve highlighted exactly the problem:  the Maduro regime continues to murder and torture and intimidate the Venezuelan people.  This isn’t a question of counting time based on days; it’s counting time based on the number of deaths that the Maduro regime is perpetuating.  And so we are 100 percent committed to the resolution of this crisis.  We believe that the resolution of this crisis will be brought about through a transitional government that will lead to free and fair presidential elections, and we plan on helping the international community understand what those free and fair conditions look like.  These are based on international standards, these are based on the Venezuelan constitution, and it’s critical that we try to resolve this crisis as quickly and as peacefully as possible.

Question:  A year after you recognized and many other countries recognized Guaido, the Maduro regime is still firmly in power despite sweeping sanctions against it from the United States.  So what are you going to do in 2020 to bring about the transition that you seek; what further measures do you plan to take; will they go beyond individual sanctions; will they include, for example, a naval blockade of Venezuela?

DAS Filipetti:  Thank-you, I can’t preview any specific actions, but what I can say is that we will be continuing our strategy of working to support the National Assembly and Interim President Juan Guaido, as well as continuing our sanctions policies to the extent that we need to.  Pressuring the Maduro regime is critical because it’s that pressure that has gotten the regime to come to the table in the first place.  They have not negotiated in good faith.  We need to make sure they understand that time is not on their side, and if they want to participate in a negotiation, it needs to be a true negotiation where they are discussing how to get to a transitional government to lead to presidential elections.  So we will be continuing on that policy as we go forward.  

I also think that we saw something really critical on Sunday, which is that we’ve known for the past year that Maduro lacks support of the people of Venezuela.  This is exactly why he tried to buy votes, as opposed to just relying on having them.  But he wasn’t able to.  And then we saw him rely on the tactic that he has used throughout 2019, which is violence and intimidation, and even that now is failing him.  

And so we’ve seen how Guaido has defeated these attempts to – of intimidation, of violence, and a physical blockade, and he still was able to win re-election.  So the regime pulled out all the stops and they utterly failed, and I think this is an example that even his brutality and intimidation will not be successful in 2020.

Question:  What is the U.S. prepared to do if Maduro and his loyal forces, the military, the police, lash out against Juan Guaido or National Assembly members?

DAS Filipetti:  I mean, this is something that we need to pay attention to.  We have seen that the Maduro regime is increasingly desperate, and increasingly desperate regimes resort to increasingly brutal tactics.  We saw that on Sunday.  This was not a technique that the Maduro regime had to deploy in May 2018.  They were able to manipulate the election in other ways, but now they’ve moved to brute force.  

It is critical that we ensure that the people of Venezuela do not get attacked by the Venezuelan military.  We need to make sure – you know, a lot of the Venezuelan military, they’re being mistreated by the Maduro regime as well.  A lot of the officers have been thrown in prison.  They are having loyalty checks that are done on them by the Cubans.  It’s important that we recognize that and we try to highlight those divisions to show that the military needs to be on the right side of history here.

Question:  I just wanted to ask whether the United States is going to be able to release any aid to the Venezuelan opposition this year.  I know there was an attempt last year to get appropriations of some money which is badly needed by the opposition in order to fund activities, particularly in the diplomatic missions abroad, and they’ve complained that it’s been very slow to get hold of this money.  I wondered if there’s been any progress on that ?

DAS Filipetti:  The U.S. was able to pass last year a development agreement that USAID is implementing, and they have been implementing those funds.  We are working through implementing partners who are working with the National Assembly, who are working with Interim President Guaido’s team to make sure that the needs of the democratic actors are being meet.  And then, of course, we also have our additional humanitarian assistance which is going directly to the people of Venezuela through our implementing partners as well.

Question:  The power of Russia and Cuba and the support they need to give Venezuela were underestimated.  In what term was it underestimated?  When United – when did the United States start changing their measures to be more effective with this kind of problems with Russia and Cuba in Venezuela?

DAS Filipetti:  What we’ve realized with the Russians and the Cubans is that they are willing to sacrifice their own strength and their own power to go down with Maduro.  We’re frankly surprised, because when they look at the Maduro regime, there – it’s clear that there’s incompetence, it’s clear that there’s undemocratic principles, there’s dictatorship, there’s violence, there’s intimidation, there’s harassment, there’s human rights violations.  And the Cubans and the Russians have decided to throw their weight behind that, both in terms of financial support, but also in terms of surveillance support and military support when it comes to the Cuban regime.  

So we are very focused on making sure that these two pillars of support for the Maduro regime are no longer able to sustain it.  I think focusing on the international support for the Maduro regime is critical, because anybody who looks at what happened on Sunday needs to recognize and acknowledge that this was a violation of Venezuelan sovereignty, a violation of the Venezuelan constitution, and a violation of democratic principles.  And anyone who stands behind that has made it clear where they stand.

Question:  Do you see any military presence of Russia in Venezuela now, and do you observe any ins and outs of Russian military groups to Venezuela?

DAS Filipetti:  Thanks, So we have seen some Russian technical military presence inside Venezuela.  We’ve seen that since March of 2019 when we first announced that we were seeing some Russian troops landing inside Venezuela.  I would note that the National Assembly has not given any authorization for the Russians, the Cubans, or any other foreign military officials to be inside Venezuela, so therefore, their presence is also a violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and illegal under Venezuelan domestic law.

Question:  Juan Guaido is outside the building where the National Assembly sessions, and he still can’t get in.  So two hypothetical situations.  What will happen or what will America do in case of Juan Guaido doesn’t get the opportunity to get inside of the building, or what will happen, what will do if he gets arrested by the Maduro task forces? 

DAS Filipetti:  Thanks, So with the second question first, I mean, I think you all have seen the tactics that the U.S. Government has used and deployed throughout the course of the last year.  If there was something like an escalation, an arrest of Guaido, et cetera, I think you would see even additional actions far beyond what we have pushed out to date.  And of course, it would be completely unacceptable as well to our international partners who have made it clear that there is a line in the sand when it comes to Guaido’s security.  He is legitimately elected by the National Assembly as the President, and of course, was elected to the National Assembly by the people of Venezuela.  

When it comes to your first question, this is something we’re tracking very closely.  It’s important to remember that the building is not the democratic process.  The democratic process is the ability of elected officials to meet together to discuss policies that will help the people of Venezuela.  And so if they can’t get into the building, then I suspect that they will go somewhere else where they will have a quorum and have a constitutional basis for holding a discussion to try to resolve this crisis and to try to provide for the people of Venezuela.  So if Luis Parra and 18 other people decide to stay in the National Assembly building, well, they don’t have a quorum.  They have no authority to be there.  They were not elected to that position according to the Venezuelan constitution, and we’ll focus on where the actual National Assembly is meeting.

DAS Filipetti:  Thank-you very much.  I would just say we appreciate everybody’s interest in this.  I think watching what happens today, as Herbert mentioned, Juan Guaido is attempting to get into the National Assembly building.  We are continuing to see the Maduro regime deploy these violent tactics.  I think it’s very important that we all continue to monitor the situation and recognize that the Maduro regime’s attempts to manipulate January 5th were a complete failure.

January 7, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Defence

KONGSBERG signs two agreements with NDLO

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 7, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

KONGSBERG and Norwegian Defence Logistics Organisation (NDLO) signs two agreements which strengthens the cooperation between the two parties, respectively on air and sea.

The first agreement is a framework agreement for follow on technical support of systems that KONGSBERG has delivered to the Norwegian Armed Forces. The signing parties are Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace and NDLO.

KONGSBERG will support the Norwegian Armed Forces with maintenance and engineering services on equipment on board the Navy’s vessels. This includes the breadth of the company’s portfolio, from missile systems and weapon stations to command / control and navigation systems. The agreement continues and expands KONGSBERG’s previously signed framework agreement with the Norwegian Armed Forces, and the annual minimum scope is NOK 71 million for the first years.

The second agreement was signed between Kongsberg Aviation Maintenance Services and NDLO and is related to maintenance and support of the Norwegian NH-90 helicopter fleet. The agreement will initially apply for the years 2020-2026, and there will be annual calls from the agreement. The estimated value is about NOK 400 million distributed over the first four years, subject to it being renegotiated after two years.

Maintenance will mainly be carried out at the Bardufoss main base. This means that existing expertise on helicopter maintenance will be utilized, both from KONGSBERG and Finnish Patria. The latter already supports the Norwegian Armed Forces in the maintenance of NH-90 helicopters in Bardufoss today. In addition, KONGSBERG recognise the need to further strengthen the business with new hires.

It is a clear ambition to gradually increase the operational availability of the NH-90 helicopters in the years to come.

“The contracts with KONGSBERG provide us with increased maintenance and engineering capacity and this contributes to enhanced readiness. The ambition is to increase technical availability on sea and air systems and we are confident that these long-term contacts will contribute in this regard. At the same time, the Norwegian defence industry becomes stronger, which is also important for the Norwegian Armed Forces, says Petter Jansen, Chief Executive at the Norwegian Defence Logistics Organisation.

“Both agreements are the result of a long-term commitment to maintenance and preparedness by both the Norwegian Armed Forces and KONGSBERG, and they lay grounds for further development of expertise in the area,” says Eirik Lie, CEO of Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace.

“For us, the support agreement for sea systems is an important building block for a long-term commitment for us to develop, in collaboration with the Norwegian Armed Forces. Going forward, this will also contribute to strengthening our activity at Haakonsvern, where we see a significant potential for growth in maintenance, repair and overhaul of such systems.

Lie is also very positive to the possibility of increased activity in Bardufoss related to the maintenance agreement for the NH-90 helicopter.

“KONGSBERG will, through this agreement, and together with Patria, strengthen our presence in Indre Troms. The agreement continues the intention of strategic cooperation and will, over time, contribute to increased operational availability for the Armed Forces,” says Lie.

Source: Kongsberg Gruppen

January 7, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Science

Norwegian shipowner fits BWMS on domestic vessel

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 5, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

While the international ballast water management convention has been implemented to prevent the spread of potentially harmful aquatic organisms via ballast water from vessels in international traffic, there are no such regulations for ships only commuting between Norwegian waters and the open sea.

Austevoll-based shipowner Hordafor’s commercial vessel Hordafor IV sails exclusively in domestic Norwegian waters, but shipowner Hordafor has nevertheless chosen to order a ballast water treatment system from Norwegian company PG Flow Solutions, a specialist in liquid handling and pump systems for marine applications.

“We want to be a leader within biosafety and do what we can to optimise both marine and fish health on behalf of our clients. If treatment of ballast water can contribute towards improved biosecurity along the Norwegian coastline, it will be a good investment in both the environment and our business,” says Hordafor’s fleet manager Karsten Østervold.

Hordafor is a leading player within handling and processing of by-products from the Norwegian aquaculture and fisheries industries. The shipowner has its own vessels for shipping by-product and finished products such as marine oils and proteins.

The Hordafor IV vessel is utilised to collect silage from by-products from the aquaculture industry. With a ballast water treatment system, the vessel can now also sail in international waters.

“We have six such vessels, and they all sail along the Norwegian coast. We installed a ballast water treatment system on board one of the ships to evaluate the positive effects it can create. Biosecurity is important to us, which is why we invested a seven-figure sum in this,” said Karsten Østervold.

PG Flow Solutions has been contracted to supply its IMO-approved PG-Hyde ballast water treatment system to Hordafor IV. The system is based on UV-technology in combination with automatic, self-cleaning filters. The PG-Hyde treatment system sterilises the ballast water during both ballasting and de-ballasting.

“Ballast water systems regulate the intake, discharge and treatment of ballast water and sediments, and is therefore an important environmental measure to prevent the spread of foreign species through ballast water from vessels that sail in international waters. The fact that Hordafor, for biosecurity reasons, wants to explore and apply the same mindset to a vessel that sails along the Norwegian coastline is a great initiative. We are a proud supplier to Hordafor,” said PG Flow Solutions’ sales manager Are Hjertvik.

PG Flow Solutions is a provider of proprietary solutions, systems and products for companies within the energy, maritime, aquaculture and land-based process industries. The heritage of the business is pumps and pumping systems. The company’s headquarters and manufacturing facility is located in Sande, Vestfold, Norway. Its subsidiary Calder Ltd operates out of a similar facility in Worcester outside Birmingham, UK, while subsidiary Cflow Fish Handling AS operates out of Aalesund, Norway.

January 5, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Crimes

Norway to block iGaming transactions

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 3, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The government will block iGaming transactions in Norway involving unauthorised websites to prevent unregulated cash flow.

Norway.- The online gambling market is the future (and present) of the industry and forces governments to properly regulate it. That’s why the Norwegian government has taken a step towards strengthening the segment.

The government will demand financial institutions in Norway to block iGaming payments to unlicensed operators. Norway’s Lotteri-og stiftelsestilsynet regulatory body confirmed January 1, 2020, which involves its order on said institutions.

“The change also means that banks and others who have payment services in Norway must investigate all payment transactions to and from payment intermediaries or companies that are not allowed to offer gambling in Norway if the regulator comes up with a decision on this,” the regulator had said.

“We can also instruct banks and others with payment services in Norway to provide information about companies that provide payment related to gambling.”

The regulator has sent a letter of information to Norwegian banks, financial institutions and payment agencies about the changes.

Norsk Tipping, the state-owned gambling company, could soon assume responsibility for the horse racing monopoly in Norway. The rights of the activity are currently under Norsk Rikstoto, but they expire at the end of 2021.

The Norwegian government will consider which company is more fit for the exclusive rights model. The Ministry of Culture in collaboration with the Ministry of Agriculture and Food will assess which company should be in charge of the horse racing monopoly.

Minister of Agriculture and Food Olaug Bollestad sad: “The government’s gambling policy must first and foremost take into account the social responsibility and consideration of gambling addicts. At the same time, it is important for the government to ensure that the future solution is for the best for Norwegian equestrian sport.”

January 3, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Media Freedom

World welcomes 2020

by Nadarajah Sethurupan January 1, 2020
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

As clocks struck midnight, people all around the world welcomed not only the new year of 2020 but also a new decade.

Spectacular displays of fireworks were held in major cities around the globe.

We at ‘NORWAY NEWS’, wish all our reader a wonderful and prosperous new year.

January 1, 2020 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Middle East and Norway

US strikes to ‘deter Iran’

by Nadarajah Sethurupan December 30, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The United States is not seeking to escalate its simmering conflict with Iran, a senior official said on Monday after the Pentagon launched air strikes on Tehran-allied Iraqi militia forces.

US Assistant Secretary of State David Schenker said the Sunday strikes on Hezbollah Brigades bases were a message to Iran after months of “restraint” by the administration of President Donald Trump.

The airstrikes – the largest yet by the US targeting an Iraqi state-sanctioned militia – were in response to a rocket attack on a US base last week that killed an American contractor.

“This was a defensive action that was designed to protect American forces and American citizens in Iraq but we are also working on the mission set of restoring deterrents against Iranian aggression,” US special representative for Iran Brian Hook said. “After so many attacks it was important for the president to direct our armed forces to respond in a way that the Iranian regime will understand.”

Schenker said the locations hit on Sunday were “significant targets and the ones on the Syrian side of the border were even more significant in many ways.”

Both Hook and Schenker said the US does not want an escalation in the region, but rather a “deescalation.”

Hook said that the US has enhanced their “troop posture by 14,000 to the region since May, specifically with Saudi (Arabia), where they have enhanced their air defenses.”

He said the US works very closely with regional allies, especially the countries that are “on the front line of Iranian aggression, to protect them against Iranian attacks, whether it kinetic or cyber.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Special Briefing via Telephone with Special Representative for Iran and Senior Policy Advisor to the Secretary of State Brian Hook and Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs David Schenker and State Department Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus.

Ms. Ortagus:  The Secretary was on U.S. news media this morning, for all of you who haven’t seen it, talking about the actions that the U.S. took over the weekend.  And both he and Brian Hook and myself will also be on media later today. 

So we’re here to answer any of your questions, but I think that this is an incredibly significant moment for the U.S.  And I think I’ll just go ahead and quickly turn it over to Brian and let him give some opening remarks, and then we’ll jump right into Q&A. 

Mr. Hook:  Thanks very much, Morgan.  One of the things that we want to emphasize is that this was a defensive action that was designed to protect American forces and American citizens in Iraq.  But we’re also working on the mission set of restoring deterrence against Iranian aggression.  This is an Iranian-backed rogue militia, Kata’ib Hezbollah, and they are not acting in the interests of the Iraqi people.  They are violating Iraq’s sovereignty.  And we know that the Iranian regime runs an expansionist foreign policy by the supreme leader and Qasem Soleimani.  And they have been running an expansionist foreign policy for some time. 

Our campaign of maximum economic pressure is making it much harder for them to accomplish that.  We have repeatedly – the President and the Secretary of State have made clear repeatedly that if our – that if we are attacked by the regime or by one of its proxies, that we will take decisive action in response.

And President Trump took that yesterday with the strikes that were in five different locations.  And these locations included weapons storage facilities and also some of the command and control locations that Kata’ib Hezbollah uses to plan and execute attacks against American forces and also against Iraqis.

It’s important to remember that the United States is in Iraq and the coalition – they are there at the invitation of the Iraqi Government.  And when our forces and the Iraqi forces are attacked, as they have been, there have been – we’ve already seen, just in the past two months alone, 11 attacks on bases inside Iraq that are hosting coalition forces. 

So the President has been very patient.  He has shown a great deal of restraint because the last thing the United States is looking for is kinetic action in the Middle East, any conflict in the Middle East.  We have kept our foreign policy squarely in the left-right limits of diplomacy.  But we’ve also made clear that we will not tolerate attacks against U.S. citizens, our military, or our partners and allies in the region. 

And so there are a number of statements that have been made since September 11th of 2018 on this – on this threat.  We made – and we very much hoped that Iran would not miscalculate and confuse our restraint for weakness.  But after so many attacks, it was important for the President to direct our armed forces to respond in a way that the Iranian regime will understand. 

Ms. Ortagus:  Great.  Thanks.  And just a reminder that we also have Dave Schenker on the line, who can – our Assistant Secretary for NEA, who can also answer questions as well.  And I’ll just turn it over to the  Media Hub for the Q&A. 

Question:  I have a question on the logic of the operation from a foreign policy standpoint.  The five sites that were picked in Western Iraq and in Syria are not located anywhere near the location of the Kirkuk base where the American contractor was killed.  It looks as if your goal was to carry out strikes in relatively isolated areas that would be on the low end of escalation to avoid escalation and limit collateral damage.  Was that the thinking behind this?  And also, what is the legal rationale for the strikes since self-defense is often thought of as an action that’s taken to thwart an imminent attack, not a retaliatory attack two days later against a location in a different part of the country? 

Assistant Secretary Schenker:  Well, I don’t want to get into why we chose what targets.  Let’s say these were significant targets, and the ones on the Syrian side of the border were, I think, even more significant in many ways, although I’m not going to get into why.

But so if you look at this, this was a response that was serious but was, I think, in many ways proportionate.  We don’t want an escalation here; we want a de-escalation.  But what we have seen, as Brian said before, is that the Iranians have, let’s say over the past several years, taken our non-response as – understanding that as weakness and have continuously pushed the envelope.  And so we’ve seen in terms of the trajectory of their strikes that they have come increasingly closer to killing American personnel. 

They surround U.S. bases, they come closer to U.S. bases, they hit on different parts of U.S. bases, and finally, inevitably, they kill an American.  This was not a mistake and we thought it important to hit a significant target set to send a very clear message to them about – about how serious we take American lives.

Likewise, importantly, this was – the violation of sovereignty here, if there was a violation of sovereignty, occurred on Friday when Iranian-backed forces basically shot missiles, rockets at an Iraqi military base.  And so I think we should be – we can talk about the U.S. response and the defensive strikes that re-establish deterrence, but we should also talk about how Iran continuously violates Iraqi sovereignty.

Question:  I wanted to ask are there any other targeted locations of Hizballah and – of Hizballah in Iraq and Syria?  And can you please assess the level of threat imposed by Iran in the region?

Mr. Hook:  We don’t ever preview military action or military targets.

Question:  Okay.  And can you assess the level of threat imposed by Iran in the region?

Mr. Hook:  Well, Iran has been threatening the region – the Islamic Republic – for the last 40 years.  But what we do know is that the regime is facing its worst financial crisis and its worst political crisis in its 40-year history.  And the Trump administration has weakened the regime and its proxies financially in ways that have no historic precedent.  And this is having, from our perspective, very positive consequences in terms of drying up the revenue the proxies need to undermine the sovereignty of countries like Iraq.

And now what we’re seeing, we are seeing the people of Lebanon, the peoples of Iraq, and the peoples of Iran all rising up against the Iranian model of dominance and exporting terror and weaponizing sectarian grievances and enriching themselves at the expense of the people that they govern.  And that’s true – one thing I’ll point out that’s very important for people to recognize:   You had protests in a hundred cities in Iran, you had protests all over Iraq and Lebanon.  None of them were directed at the United States, the United States Government, or American sanctions. 

These are people that are rejecting the Iranian model that they have been exporting for some time, and people are tired of the corruption, of the lack of transparency, of having their national wealth stolen to finance proxy wars. And so that’s our assessment of the current Iranian threat.  It’s weakening and it will get weaker, especially as our sanctions increase in 2020.  And we will compound Iran’s economic – it’s already now at negative 10, 11, 12 percent roughly – in that category.  And Secretary Pompeo made clear a year and a half ago that the Iranian regime faces a choice, and the supreme Leader keeps choosing to manage economic collapse.

Question:  You’ve already had an Iranian retaliatory attack on an airbase in Iraq, Taji.  Why do you think that you have deterred Iran with what is really a modest strike?

Mr. Hook:  I didn’t say that we had deterred Iran.  I said that our policy is to restore deterrence that was lost under the – Obama’s nuclear deal.  And Iran was able to run an expansionist foreign policy for many years while countries looked the other way in order to preserve and protect the deal.  Now that we’re out of the deal, we’re in a much better picture to squeeze the regime economically and to impose costs on them for behaving like an outlaw regime.  And so it is unquestionable that Iran is facing its worst financial and political crisis, and so I think your question to some extent is sort of not fully appropriating the current headwinds that the regime is facing.  

Now, what we’ve done yesterday is also made very clear that we will act in defense of our interests when we are attacked.  So we are combining our diplomacy with hard power, and we’re very pleased with the progress that we’ve made.

Question:  We understand the potential deterrence options, the administration in early May issued a warning about potential Iranian strikes on U.S. interests, oil infrastructure, in the region.  And eight months later, some of those warnings have actually happened, or there have been attacks on tankers, oil infrastructure, now on a U.S. military base.  So are the actions the United States has taken not been sufficient, or those – or did the specific attacks come as a surprise?  I’m just trying to understand.  And when you talk about restoring deterrence, what possible options can there be that hasn’t helped in the last eight months?

Mr. Hook:  We don’t preview any options that we’re considering or that we will be taking, and so I don’t have anything to offer about the future.  But since May, we have enhanced our troop posture by 14,000 – 14,000 additional troops to the region since May. Specifically with Saudi, we have enhanced their air defenses, the United States along with other countries.  We work very closely with our partners in the region to – especially the countries that are on the front lines of Iranian aggression – to protect them against Iranian attacks, whether it’s kinetic or cyber.  And so we’re working very closely with all of our partners in the region.

The International Maritime Security Initiative has a number of countries that are participating in it.  We have enhanced our intelligence, our surveillance, our reconnaissance activities, and we know that the combination of all of these things has disrupted and deterred many attacks that the regime would have liked to have execute.  We’ve also made clear for some time that we’re not going to tolerate these kinds of attacks.  The President has shown a lot of restraint and that has been – I think if you talk to the leaders in the region, they’ve been very pleased with the restraint that the President has shown. 

I think Iran would like to bait the President into all sorts of things, but the President has shown, I think, very skillful leadership navigating through this, using our diplomacy backed up by hard power.

Assistant Secretary Schenker:  I’d say that there has been sort of a lashing out that we can see as the economic pressure has really taken hold since May.  You saw in June the Fujairah.  You saw escalation from the Houthis.  You saw increased targeting, operational tempo of targeting of U.S. assets in Iraq by Iranian proxies.  Then you saw the shooting down of a UAV.  And after every one of these incidents – there’s the scuttling of boats, the hijacking of boats – after every time this occurred, what you saw from the United States, from the President, was strategic patience that, as Brian said, was widely appreciated throughout the region from our allies.  And finally, the downing of a U.S. UAV in international waters over the Gulf, and we responded just with more sanctions.

And so this type of patience has resulted in incredible lashing out that culminated with Abqaiq most recently, the attack on ARAMCO.  And still we are exercising this strategic patience.  And so now they had to go and try and escalate this further by killing an American citizen, and I think we have responded I think with strength and with careful – carefully, I think, calibrating what is appropriate, to try and reestablish that deterrence.  

Mr. Hook:  I think it’s also the case that Iran is currently in a state of panicked aggression.  The regime understands very clearly the kind of economic pressure they’re under, and they also know that it’s not sustainable.  And so they are lashing out.  They’re not used to being told no.  They’re not used to seeing this kind of resolve.  And the President is, I think, very carefully deploying our – sort of our diplomats, working on the right mission set, and also our military.

December 30, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Russia and Norway

NATO records Russia’s largest submarine activity since end of Cold War

by Nadarajah Sethurupan December 30, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

NATO has fixated Russia’s largest submarine activity since the end of the Cold War: ten Russian submarines were immediately located around Norway in October, RND reports.

“In mid-October this year, a swarm of modern Russian submarines initially openly demonstrated force in the North Atlantic, moving west across the territory between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom, and then went to deep waters,” the newspaper wrote.

This year, NATO has recorded the largest activity of Russian submarines since the end of the Cold War. For this reason, the modernization of maritime capabilities has now been the subject of intense debate at the Alliance’s headquarters in Brussels.

“Russia is steadily increasing its operations underwater. Most of all – it concerns the North Atlantic and the Norwegian Sea. NATO will respond, inter alia, with an increase in patrolling. In addition, they will invest money in modern anti-submarine aircraft missiles,” NATO’s Press Secretary, Oana Lungescu, stated.

She also stressed that the North Atlantic remains “vital to Europe’s security” in terms of military supply routes, civilian trade routes and communication channels.

Western planners are particularly concerned about the connection between submarines and rockets that they can launch. In recent years, Putin has introduced technological improvements in both areas: submarines have become much quieter and Russian missiles have been faster than before.

It is expected that Russian submarines will receive supersonic rockets in 2020 – and it is not yet known if modern Western interception systems can stop them at all.

As we reported earlier, Germany and four other NATO members signed a document in Hamburg, which is set to strengthen co-operation aimed at protecting maritime routes in the English Channel and the North Sea, Deutsche Welle informed.

NATO intends to strengthen its position in the North Sea and the English Channel in order to be ready to repel Russia’s threat: The relevant provisions are contained in an agreement signed on Thursday, November 7 by heads of naval forces of Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and the Netherlands in Hamburg.

December 30, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Norwegian Nobel Prize 2024

101207 The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2024 to Japan’s Hiroshima bomb survivor group Nihon Hidankyo.

Special Interest

  • Africa and Norway
  • Asia and Norway
  • Asylum
  • China and Norway
  • Corruption in Norway
  • Crimes
  • Defence
  • Diplomatic relations
  • Economics
  • Environment
  • Farming
  • Killing
  • Media Freedom
  • Middle East and Norway
  • NATO and Norway
  • Nobel Peace Prize
  • Norwegian Aid
  • Norwegian American
  • Oil & Gas
  • Peace Talks
  • Politics
  • Racism in Norway
  • Religion
  • Russia and Norway
  • Royal House
  • Science
  • Sex scandal
  • Sports
  • Spy War
  • Srilanka and Norway
  • Svalbard
  • Terrorist
  • Taiwan and Norway
  • Video clips

Follow Us

Recent Posts

  • Norway and Germany sign defence arrangement

    February 15, 2026
  • China hopes Norway will play a role in the Europe ties

    February 15, 2026
  • Norwegian cross-country skier breaks Olympic medal record

    February 15, 2026
  • Norway police search former PM’s properties in Epstein links probe

    February 12, 2026
  • Afghan National Killed in Norway

    February 11, 2026
  • Việt Nam strengthening cooperation with Norway: Việt Nam FM

    February 11, 2026

Social Feed

Social Feed

Editors’ Picks

Norway opens market for Sri Lankan fish exports...

May 13, 2016

Sri Lanka – Nordic Business Council holds discussions...

May 15, 2016

Good governance to Sri Lanka

May 15, 2016

Shock and Joy in Sri Lanka – Erik...

May 15, 2016

Sri Lanka-Norway plenty of new opportunities for business–...

May 15, 2016

NORWAY NEWS is an online news site, written in English, dedicated to Norwegian affairs at home and abroad. Norway News.com is published online. It is a daily online newspaper in existence since May, 2003. The site is run by an Independent Journalist.

Facebook Twitter Youtube

Useful Links

    • Work With Us
    • Contact Us
    • Collaboration
    • Data Collection
    • Workplace
    • Adverstising
    • Privacy Policy
    • International Collab
    • Feedback
    • Terms of Use
    • About Our Ads
    • Help & Support
    • Entertainment
    • News Covering
    • Technology
    • Trending Now

Politics

Syrian, Norway to boost cooperation on mine clearance
Erna to step down as Conservative Party leader in 2026
Norwegian Labour Party on re-election win

Latest Articles

Norway and Germany sign defence arrangement
China hopes Norway will play a role in the Europe ties
Norwegian cross-country skier breaks Olympic medal record
Norway police search former PM’s properties in Epstein links probe

Norway News 2025 . All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by Norway News

  • Home
  • About us
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us
NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
  • Home
  • About us
  • News
  • Other News
    • Africa and Norway
    • Asia and Norway
    • Asylum
    • Breaking News
    • China and Norway
    • Corruption in Norway
    • Crimes
    • Defence
    • Diplomatic relations
    • Economics
    • Environment
    • Farming
    • Featured
    • Health
    • Killing
    • Media Freedom
    • Middle East and Norway
    • NATO and Norway
    • Nobel Peace Prize
    • Norwegian Aid
    • Norwegian American
    • Oil & Gas
    • Peace Talks
    • Politics
    • Racism in Norway
    • Religion
    • Royal House
    • Russia and Norway
    • Science
    • Sex scandal
    • Sports
    • Spy War
    • Srilanka and Norway
    • Svalbard
    • Taiwan and Norway
    • Terrorist
    • Travel
    • Video clips
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us
NORWAY NEWS – latest news, breaking stories and comment – NORWAY NEWS
  • Home
  • About us
  • News
  • Other News
    • Africa and Norway
    • Asia and Norway
    • Asylum
    • Breaking News
    • China and Norway
    • Corruption in Norway
    • Crimes
    • Defence
    • Diplomatic relations
    • Economics
    • Environment
    • Farming
    • Featured
    • Health
    • Killing
    • Media Freedom
    • Middle East and Norway
    • NATO and Norway
    • Nobel Peace Prize
    • Norwegian Aid
    • Norwegian American
    • Oil & Gas
    • Peace Talks
    • Politics
    • Racism in Norway
    • Religion
    • Royal House
    • Russia and Norway
    • Science
    • Sex scandal
    • Sports
    • Spy War
    • Srilanka and Norway
    • Svalbard
    • Taiwan and Norway
    • Terrorist
    • Travel
    • Video clips
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact us

Editor’s Picks

  • UN concern over Sri Lanka’s cases of enforced disappearances

    October 8, 2025
  • UN Human Rights Council Resolution on Sri Lanka’s Path to Reconciliation

    October 7, 2025
  • International should support Sri Lanka: Solheim

    October 4, 2024
  • Norwegian Meets Sri Lankan’s Challenges

    May 3, 2024
  • Norwegian Ambassador meets JVP in Sri Lanka

    May 2, 2024
  • “The man who didn’t run away” – Eric Solheim

    April 30, 2024

Newsletter

@2025 - All Right Reserved. Designed and Developed by Norway News