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
Tuesday, November 11, 2025
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

Norway Launches International Development Strategy on Combating Non-Communicable Diseases

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 26, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

‘We cannot eradicate poverty by 2030 without better health. Norway’s new strategy to combat non-communicable diseases in developing countries makes a key contribution to those goals,’ says Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein.

The Norwegian Government today launches a milestone “Better Health, Better Lives” strategy to combat deadly non-communicable diseases (NCDs) as part of its international development assistance. NCDs cause some 70% of deaths worldwide and are now a major, growing cause of illness and premature death in low- and middle income countries.

Norway is the first country to develop such a strategy for combating this large global health threat as part of development cooperation. Prevention and control of NCDs currently receives only about 1% of health-related development assistance.  These diseases often develop into chronic conditions, resulting in disastrously high health care treatment costs for individuals and health systems that are already lacking in resources.

‘Worldwide, 41 million people die each year as a result of respiratory disease, cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, mental disorders and other non-communicable diseases. This cannot continue. Therefore, Norway will triple its assistance to fight NCDs, allocating over 200 million NOK to these agendas for 2020. This is just the start, we will step up the funding towards 2024,’ said Ulstein.

Minister of Health, Bent Høie, notes that the strategy builds upon WHO’s normative work on NCDs, and particularly the 16 WHO-recommended “Best Buys” – interventions for the prevention and control of NCDs. 

‘If these were implemented, over 8 million lives could be saved annually by 2030; there would also be a total savings of $US 7 trillion in low- and middle-income countries over the next 15 years,’ he said, citing WHO data.

The new strategy has three main points of focus: strengthening primary health care; prevention targeting leading NCD risk factors such as air pollution, tobacco and harmful alcohol consumption and unhealthy diets; and strengthening standards and guidelines, as well as health data and information systems.

‘It has been documented that taxation and regulation of products that are harmful to health can be used to effectively discourage consumption of health-harmful products such as tobacco and alcohol.  I am happy that the strategy is so clear on this point. Norway will support countries requesting assistance to implement such measures,’ said the Minister of Health. Similarly, pollution taxes and regulations can encourage shifts to clean energy and transport, reducing health-harmful air pollution.

The strategy will support the SDG 3 targets of reducing premature deaths from NCDs by one-third by 2030 (SDG 3.4); Universal Health Coverage (SDG 3.8); as well as targets for reducing deaths from air pollution; strengthening tobacco control and preventing harmful use of alcohol.

‘Non-communicable diseases are the leading killers of our time. As is so often the case, the world’s poorest bear the heaviest burden. The risks of dying between the ages of 30 and 70 from a heart attack, stroke, diabetes, cancer or asthma are 4 times higher in most countries of Africa than in Norway,’ said WHO’s Director General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in a videotaped message broadcast at the «Gathering for the Future of Global Health» on the occasion of today’s strategy launch in Oslo.

‘Thank you for your leadership in this important area. WHO is delighted to accept your invitation to be a co-sponsor of this strategy,’ said Dr. Tedros.

  • See a livestream of the launch event and programme details
  • See an English language summary of the strategy including underlying commitments in the three strategic areas of action

(Ministry of Foreign AffairsMinistry of Health and Care Services)

November 26, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Politics

Global anti-landmine summit to get underway in Norway, a mine action leader

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 25, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The nearest minefield is nearly 2,000 kilometres away from Oslo, yet over 700 delegates from the world over have come to Norway for the quinquennial global summit against anti-personnel mines. The Oslo Review Conference on a Mine-Free World is the name given to the meeting of the Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Production, Stockpiling and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on Their Destruction (or Mine Ban Convention for short).

The Conference is the world’s largest gathering of government representatives, mine action experts and survivors. Business is underway with over three dozen experts on assistance to victims attending a side meeting inaugurated this morning by Norwegian Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein, and the UN Secretary General’s Special Envoy on Disability and Accessibility.

HRH Crown Prince Haakon of Norway, the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs H.E. Eriksen Søreide, and the Special Envoys of the Convention, HRH Princess Astrid of Belgium and HRH Prince Mired Raad Zeid Al-Hussein of Jordan will inaugurate the meeting at the Oslo City Hall on 25 November at 16:00. Discussions and deliberations begin on Tuesday 26 November at 09:00 at the Clarion Hotel The Hub and end on 29 November.

If there are no minefields in Norway, why then a meeting in Oslo?

In a way the Convention is coming back to one of its birthplaces. “Norway is a firm supporter of the norm against these forbidden and indiscriminate weapons and actively campaigned with like-minded States to create this strong humanitarian disarmament instrument more than 20 years ago. In fact, the Convention was adopted here in Oslo on 18 September 1997,” said the Norwegian Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Hans Brattskar who presides over the work of the treaty.

“The Mine Ban Convention is a lifesaving protection instrument aiming to end the suffering and casualties caused by anti-personnel mines. This is in line with Norway’s humanitarian strategy and strong focus on protection. This Convention has achieved a lot but 20 years on, it needs renewed political attention in order to respond to new challenges. Norway will continue to be a consistent partner in mine action,” added the Ambassador.

In addition to receiving reports on efforts to clear mines in 32 States Parties and assistance to victims in 30 States including in some of the poorest on earth, destroy stocks of anti-personnel mines in three countries (two of them in Europe), and advance the acceptance of this Convention among States that have not yet joined, the Conference will have the following tasks at hand,

·        Study and make decisions on the requests to be presented by Argentina, Cambodia, Chad, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Tajikistan and Yemen requesting to extend their mine clearance deadlines.

·        Discuss and adopt the Oslo Action Plan, a roadmap to implement the Convention for the next five years and towards the ambition of a mine-free world by 2025 in as many countries as possible.

·        Adopt the Oslo Political Declaration committing members to fulfil the Convention including through actions highlighted in the Oslo Action Plan to the best of their abilities.

Norway has been supporting Mine Action for 25 years and is one of the world’s top five donors for global mine action (2018: ca USD 40 million), currently funding mine action in 20 countries across the world.

The Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention was adopted in Oslo in 1997, opened for signature in Ottawa the same year and entered into force on 1 March 1999. To date, nearly 85% of the world’s states (164) have joined the Convention. These States together have destroyed nearly 52 million anti-personnel mines and returned for their normal use, millions of square metres of land that was once contaminated with mines.

November 25, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Russia and Norway

Washington gave the green light for banned missile tests

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 25, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

First effects since the USA withdraw from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) came quickly. Washington is planning to test a new ground-launched ballistic missile. In March Pentagon notified the media about its intention to test an intermediate range ballistic missile. The time has come. 

It is expected to conduct a ballistic missile test by the end of the year. The potential range of the tested missile is roughly 3,000-4,000 kilometers.  Now it is clear why the USA exited the INF Treaty.  The agreement between the USA and Soviet Union banned ballistic missiles with ranges of 500 to 5,000 kilometers. It is not surprising why the document wasn’t in the best interest with the USA. Currently Washington gave the green light for banned missile tests. 

Though American politicians promised that there is no intention to build nuclear-capable missiles that undermine the INF Treaty limits, in contrast, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that “the Department of Defense will fully pursue the development of these ground-launched conventional missiles as a prudent response to Russia’s actions and as part of the Joint Force’s broader portfolio of conventional strike options.” So, all what was necessary is to find a reason to quit the Treaty and create new intermediate nuclear-capable missiles as American officials dreamed. 

However, there are opponents of such situation. For example, Kingston Reif, of the Arms Control Association said that such pursuit is “militarily unnecessary, would force difficult and contentious conversations with and among allies, and likely would prompt Russia and China to take steps that would increase the threat to the United States and its allies.” “A 3,000- to 4,000-kilometer-range ballistic missile would pose a much more direct threat to the Russian and Chinese homelands,” he added. 

Tom Karako, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies considers that the USA needs a mix of weapons: “The future form of future strike will almost surely include a mix of UAVs, cruise missiles, ballistics and hypersonic glide vehicles. An IRBM for ourselves and our friends may well have a place in that mix.”

But it is still unknown how the test will look like. The previous cruise missile test was conducted in August. A variant of the Tomahawk land-attack weapon was launched from Mark 41 Vertical Launch System (the same launcher used in the Aegis Ashore missile defense system).  This time another version of the Mark 41 will be involved. The USA promises that Aegis Ashore won’t become offensive. But frankly speaking it’s nothing but talk.  Nothing stopped Washington from the Treaty withdrawal, nothing will prevent Pentagon from turning the ballistic missile defense (BMD) elements into offensive. 

In reality, Washington cannot fully guarantee that the US ballistic missile defense as well as planned banned missiles won’t be used for attack…According to the author of the  Australian “Contra Magazin”, 

over the past 70 years Washington invested nothing in defense as nobody attacked the USA. Predominantly, Washington spent money on financing of military campaigns in other countries with the purpose of saving its empire. And that is true.For instance, Korean war, wars and military operations in North Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Cuba, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya. However, none of these states invaded the US territory. “Contra Magazin” even says that it will be correct to call the US Department of Defense as the Imperial Department of war and interventions. The same thing happens with the US global ballistic missile defense and previously banned nuclear missile tests. Words are one thing, deeds are quite another. 

(NORWAY NEWS – Written by Valeria Shatskaya from Russia)

November 25, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Religion

U.S. Wants roundtables around Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro and Albania

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 20, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Sam Brownback, the United States ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom, pursuing an agenda of peace and building peace around the region of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro and Albania. ” He recommended two really major tools in the region, in all the countries and regionally: religious freedom roundtables in each of the countries and regionally, and these would be gathering all the activists, or the religious activists, and involving the political leadership as well, in regular discussions around religious freedom topics to guard and guarantee each other’s religious freedom operation in that nation.  A number of religious topics are coming up in the region.  Many of these are very young democracies.  There is lots of work to be done to really get the groundwork set for long-term democracy and civil society, and I think these religious freedom roundtables can help particularly on religious-oriented topics.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference by Sam Brownback, Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom.

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  My name is Sam Brownback, Ambassador-at-Large for International Religious Freedom.  I’ve just finished a weeklong, 10-day tour throughout the Balkans and then a conference yesterday that we did on the topic of religions as a tool for peace.  The whole effort, the trip, is really focused on trying to get the major faiths in the region engaged – engaged – in some places more engaged than other places, and really pursuing an agenda of peace and building peace in the region.  

This is no news to anybody there, but the nature of the Balkans conflict has been centuries-long, much of it centered around a division based upon different faiths, where the attempt and the focus here is to get these faiths engaged, fully engaged, as instruments for peace.

I was in Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, and I’m calling you from Albania, where we did the conference.  The conference was yesterday, continuing today, with religious and political leaders from throughout the region.  The conference was hosted by President Meta of Albania, the president of Kosovo, leaders of the parliament and administration in these various countries, and then also leaders of the various faith communities: Islamic, Jewish, Christian, of all types.  

I really am – I think we’re at an unusual and a very hopeful moment right now for the region.  There is calm in the region.  There are active faith communities.  In some places they’ve started to work together to build these sort of relationships that are necessary to build for long-term peace.  Unfortunately, religion is often used as an implement of division in this region and not as a tool of peace, but I think we’re at the beginning of something being quite different here, and I’m very hopeful with the meetings that I’ve had with all of the faith leaders and with the political leaders that this is a moment we can do such a thing.

I recommended two really major tools that we want to see start up in the region, in all the countries and regionally: religious freedom roundtables in each of the countries and regionally, and these would be gathering all the activists, or the religious activists, and involving the political leadership as well, in regular discussions around religious freedom topics to guard and guarantee each other’s religious freedom operation in that nation.  A number of religious topics are coming up in the region.  Many of these are very young democracies.  There is lots of work to be done to really get the groundwork set for long-term democracy and civil society, and I think these religious freedom roundtables can help particularly on religious-oriented topics.  

The second item is more difficult and – but I think maybe even more important: encouraging all of the religious leaders to go together to the sites of the atrocities in a spirit of reconciliation, repentance, forgiveness, as an effort really to heal the land and heal the souls.  Too often, this region is defined by conflict, and conflicts often that happened centuries ago but remain still vivid in people’s minds.  Those need to be addressed or they will bubble back up in future generations or future politicians will poke those raw nerves of religious tension and use this as division once again, where it’s been a point of division often in the past.

So this is a long-term effort.  I think, though, the time is right.  I think the leadership is right in the region, both religious and politically, for such a – such a move.  And this is something that can produce, then, a long-term healing, sustainable peace, and can be a model for some of the interactions of the Abrahamic faiths around the world.  So I’ve invested really quite a bit of time and effort in doing this, and will over some period of time to come, to build that long-term, durable foundation for peace.  

Question:  What are some of the lingering challenges that you see in the region to religious freedom?

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  The lack of legal framework still.  Many of these countries, as I mentioned, are young democracies and so they don’t have the framework set up yet for registering different faith communities.  Property issues is a major issue, as many of them – well, all of them were in a communist system where property was confiscated and then, now, how is the property re-divided? 

I did – again, in a very hopeful sign, I saw a great deal of different religions being practiced, and most cited no difficulty, no problems in actually operating, very low levels of communal violence, maybe some graffiti or vandalism but no organized communal violence, which is a great cultural and civil society operating effectively to let people freely practice their faith.  But the governmental systems really still need to catch up to provide the legal framework for these faith groups to operate freely.

Question:  When you visited Hungary quoted to praise the efforts of the Hungarian Government’s helping persecuted Christians in the Middle East, but we hear about persecution and intolerance against Christians in Europe too.  There are attacks against churches and the freedom of speech is also limited for Christians.  What do you think about the reasons for this phenomenon, and which European countries should do more to combat anti-Christian and anti-Semitic incidents?  

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  Unfortunately, there is a rise in the West for anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Christian rhetoric and action, and it’s throughout Europe.  We have it in the United States.  I think really the key on this is that anytime these sort of things rise is that the government response is swift and sure, where people – the government officials will say, “This does not represent the values of our country, of our people.  We’re an open, free society – people are free to believe whatever they choose to believe, or to have no beliefs at all.”  But I think the government response has to be very strong in that.  And if it’s people advocating for violence, I think there needs to be a sure response there and pushback against it.  But these are features I think that democracies really have to speak out strongly against.

And then there’s also – I think our societies are in – I don’t want to say moving anti-religious, but I think they need to be welcoming to people of faith in these societies and saying this is a good thing that people have this freedom of religion, and they should feel free and welcome, and we should have an open society for this to be freely practiced.  This is something else that governments could encourage.

Question:  What are going to be your next steps or what are the outcomes that you seek from this trip?

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  Well, next steps, really the two-fold is we’ll follow up with trying to establish more of these religious freedom roundtables, number one.  Got about 20 of them – about 20 are stood up around the world, and we’ll work in the region to see those or some type of interfaith dialogue.  Some countries in the region already have a robust interfaith dialogue and some don’t have anything, so we’ll work to get those stood up in all the countries in the region.  And then I’d like to see the initial trip planned to one of the sites of atrocities by the various faiths going together.  I’d like to see the first one of those happen.

I did work like this with reconciling with Native Americans in the United States.  I traveled as a U.S. senator to one of the sites and I did that as governor as well to where the Trail of Death for the Potawatomis was.  I went there and I went to the Sand Creek Massacre site in eastern Colorado with then Ben Nighthorse Campbell – he was a U.S. senator that was part Native American – in a reconciliation, a repentance, forgiveness ceremony.  And I hope the first of those can be stood up to happen in the first half of this next year.

Question:  What is your position on the law of freedom of religion in Montenegro, and do you expect it to be adopted?  And can such a concept of law reconcile all religious communities in the country?

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  We don’t have a specific position on the law other than we want to see every – all the religious communities engaged in an open and transparent processing in developing and passing the law.  We had robust discussions about this law, and a number of the faith communities were not pleased with the drafts of it, so I’m hopeful that they can have, again, very clear, specific discussions and dialogues before passing the law, not just pushing something on through that the major faith communities have major issues with. 

So we hosted – the embassy there and myself with it – a good discussion with the political leadership and religious leadership, and we really want to encourage a process that engages that religious community and their deep concern is transparent in what the bill’s final form and the amendment process looks like, and one that everybody then afterwards can feel some satisfaction with that this will address the needs of their community.

Ambassador-at-Large Brownback:  I do believe that the Balkans will be either a model for how the Abrahamic communities can engage with each other in a world where we have a number of conflicts brewing that need to have a robust engagement by the faith community in a positive way as instruments for peace.  I think the Balkans will be a real story, either a good model or a bad one, on how the Abrahamic communities can function together in open societies now and in the future.  And it’s my prayer and hope and my effort will be to see that this is a positive model for how we can have the religious communities strongly engage as instruments for peace. 

November 20, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
NATO and Norway

NATO open to new nuke deals with Russia, China

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 19, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

NATO is open to new arms control agreements with Russia and China, Ambassador Kay Bailey Hutchison, US Permanent Representative to NATO, told a telephonic press briefing on 18 November.

Asked by New Europe, if she sees any partnership with Russia on nuclear proliferation issues, and how can conflicting issues be overcome, Hutchison said, “Well, certainly, we are open to new arms control agreements. The INF Treaty (Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) that has been our treaty with Russia for years had to – we had to see, and NATO did look at the evidence that Russia had been violating the treaty for so long that they really had a number of the ballistic missiles that could reach any European country, and this was a violation of the INF Treaty, so it has now been disbanded, which means that we need to look for new treaties where we can include China as a major now owner and operator of missile systems that could harm any of us, if used.”

The Ambassador was speaking ahead of the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in Brussels on 20 November to finalise preparations for the meeting of NATO leaders in London.

NATO is now looking at other arms control treaties, Hutchison continued, that could be with Russia and China, “the main ones that have capabilities that could be harmful to our security. And now that we don’t have the INF and we are looking at the – how we might address the New START Treaty, all of that is in the discussion phase now and I would just say that we all are in favour of nonproliferation and arms control.”

The ambassador said in her opening statement that China has been much more active in global security issues and that now that means that NATO is going to have to assess what the risk is of China if they don’t stay within the rules-based order.

Turning to NATO-EU relations, Hutchison said the US brings a lot to the NATO alliance. “So I think that if you look at the adaptability, how we are able with our – with our umbrella of security to adapt to Russia’s malign influence and hybrid and cyber-attacks, the – we’re the ones standing for Ukraine and Georgia as the Russians have taken over that country; we’re the ones who expelled Russian spies all over the alliance when the UK got the Russian chemical agent put in its country to kill one of its former Soviet citizens. We stood firm with the UK on that, and I think that it shocked Russia that we were so unified against that horrendous act,” Hutchison said.

“We need to face China together,” she added. According to the Ambassador, the EU alone should not think that they will be able to meet the challenges of a rising China without the Transatlantic bond.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference with With Ambassador Kay Hutchison, U.S. Permanent Representative to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Ambassador Hutchison:  Well, We are looking forward to the foreign ministerial, which is our last ministerial meeting until we have our summit in London, and we’re looking forward to closing out our 70th anniversary of NATO in London with our leaders’ meeting.  

I think that we have a good agenda for the discussion of our heads of state and our ministers in this week of what we’re going to try to accomplish by the leaders’ meeting.  Most certainly, we have made progress since the Brussels meeting last summer and we have a good list of what we would try to achieve during the year, and I think we have done much of that.  Certainly, burden-sharing is an area where we have improved greatly.  I think there will be a lot of increases that will be shown by the plans that have been submitted to the secretary general by each of our countries and the defense spending that we are asking countries to do – “we” meaning NATO.  The heads of state agreed to spend 2 percent by 2024 on defense, and we are working toward that and we – I think we will have a good record of improvement – the Readiness Initiative, the Four Thirties that we are trying to achieve: 30 battalions, 30 air squadrons, 30 combat vessels in 30 days, wherever they may be needed.

And I’ll just add that I think in this Readiness Initiative, the interoperability and training that we have been doing together in our NATO missions is going to really put us in a good position if we need to be deployed somewhere because one of our nations is attacked.  I think the missions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kosovo, enhanced forward presence and others, really gives us trained forces that have worked together and know how we all do function and can be ready to go on a moment’s notice.

We have the D-ISIS Coalition that will be discussed.  We have 81 members in the D-ISIS Coalition, so NATO is a member but many other allies and partners are part of trying to wipe out the terrorist organization that has done so much harm to many of our citizens.

Then we will assess China for the first time as NATO.  It is important for us to see the opportunities as well as the challenges with China, and this is the first time that NATO has done this, but China has been much more active in global security issues and I think that now that means that we are going to have to assess what the risk is of China if they don’t stay within the rules-based order that we hope that they will, but it does appear that they are also building in a military way.  So that will be part of what the leaders discuss.

Then we will have counter – more counterterrorism action, and we think the leaders will declare that space is an operational domain that will be important for adapting to the new kinds of warfare that we’re facing.  Most certainly, we know that communications – cyber and hybrid – are part of everything we do, especially in the security area.  And so space as a domain is now certainly coming into the forefront if we are going to be ready to deter, or defend any of our nations.

Question:   Do you see any partnership with Russia on nuclear proliferation issues, and how can conflicting issues be overcome?

Ambassador Hutchison:  Well, certainly, we are open to new arms control agreements.  The INF Treaty that has been our treaty with Russia for years had to – we had to see, and NATO did look at the evidence that Russia had been violating the treaty for so long that they really had a number of the ballistic missiles that could reach any European country, and this was a violation of the INF Treaty, so it has now been disbanded, which means that we need to look for new treaties where we can include China as a major now owner and operator of missile systems that could harm any of us, if used.  

And so we’re now looking at other arms control treaties that could be with Russia and China, the main ones that have capabilities that could be harmful to our security.  And now that we don’t have the INF and we are looking at the – how we might address the New START Treaty, all of that is in the discussion phase now and I would just say that we all are in favour of nonproliferation and arms control.

Question:  Ambassador, you’ve elaborated on Russia.  I have a question regarding Turkey/Russia.  Erdogan paid a visit to Washington last week, but his statements after his visit show that Turkey will not, apparently, give up on the S-400 issue.  How do you view Turkey’s flourishing relations with Russia and how does this affect NATO’s strategies and policy planning?  

And a second question regarding the developments in the region – a NATO ally, Turkey, and its three neighbours who are facing growing instability.  Are you concerned that this might affect Turkey and, of course, NATO’s security?  

Ambassador Hutchison:  Yes.  Of course we’re concerned with Turkey taking an S-400, the Russian missile defence system.  This is going to affect the interoperability of some of our NATO equipment, particularly the F-35 airplane, which we had hoped would be a major economic value for Turkey, but now, without the F-35 being able to fly and be manufactured in a country that has an S-400, we’re sad to say that Turkey will lose this economic manufacturing capability for the F-35.  We would still like to hold out hope that Turkey would give up on using and deploying the S-400.  It is a basic tenet of an ally that you wouldn’t put an adversary’s equipment into your country, and so we’re – we are concerned that Turkey is doing that.  

Turkey is an ally.  They are a good ally in our NATO missions and we hope that they will continue as a good ally, but this is a point of contention, for sure.

Question:  What is the evidence out there that NATO is not braindead, as the French president alleged in an interview last month?

Ambassador Hutchison:  Well, first of all, I think NATO has something that the EU and the proposals that the French president has made for an EU army doesn’t have, and that is a transatlantic capability.  America brings a lot to the NATO alliance, and having the capacity that America does and the leadership to assess risk and then identify and protect against threats is a strong American attribute.  And I think that 29 of us can speak with one voice for Western values is very much more secure than any one of us would be alone.

So I think that if you look at the adaptability, how we are able with our – with our umbrella of security to adapt to Russia’s malign influence and hybrid and cyber-attacks, the – we’re the ones standing for Ukraine and Georgia as the Russians have taken over that country; we’re the ones who expelled Russian spies all over the alliance when the UK got the Russian chemical agent put in its country to kill one of its former Soviet citizens.  We stood firm with the UK on that, and I think that it shocked Russia that we were so unified against that horrendous act.

We need to face China together.  The Europeans alone should not think that they will be able to meet the challenges of a rising China without the transatlantic bond and the depth and breadth of the experience that we have in security that will help our security umbrella.

The counterterrorism actions in Afghanistan, our NATO actions – France is not even in Afghanistan in the NATO mission.  So we are protecting the terrorists from coming into NATO ally countries because we are in NATO together in the mission in Afghanistan.  France is not there with us.

So I think that France gains a lot from the NATO alliance, and I think NATO is the reliable security umbrella for all of the people in our NATO partnerships.

November 19, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Terrorist

US urges NATO to take back Daesh fighters

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 19, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The United States stepped up its push Monday for European countries to repatriate and put on trial their citizens who fought for Daesh (ISIS), launching talks with officials in Brussels.

Days after the U.S. and European allies clashed over the fate of thousands of militants jailed in Syria, the State Department’s counterterrorism coordinator Nathan Sales arrived in Brussels to press Washington’s argument that returning fighters to their home countries is the most effective way to deal with them.

“We all understand the need to be tough on terrorists. But we think the way to be tough on terrorists is to prosecute them and hold them accountable,” Sales told reporters in Brussels.

“Leaving them in the desert is not an effective solution. It makes it more likely they’re going to find their way back to the battlefield, and accepting that risk is not being tough on terrorism.

“Countries in the region have their hands full already and are doing the right thing by prosecuting or reintegrating their own citizens. We shouldn’t ask them to bear the additional burden of solving our citizens’ problems.”

“We don’t think citizenship stripping is an effective counterterrorism tool,” he said.

“In the 1990s Saudi Arabia stripped Osama bin Laden of citizenship – that did nothing to prevent 9/11.”

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference with Nathan A. Sales, Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. Department of State.

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Thanks very much and thanks to everybody for joining the call.  I wanted to raise two issues on this call today.  First, the repatriation and prosecution of foreign terrorist fighters from Syria.  And second, the role of Iran in fomenting terrorism around the world, but particularly here in Europe.  Let me walk through those two issues in a bit more detail.

First of all, on foreign terrorist fighters, last Thursday at a meeting of the Defeat ISIS Coalition in Washington, D.C., U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called on all coalition members to take back their citizens who have been captured in Syria, repatriate them to countries of origin, and prosecute them for any crimes they’ve committed.  We think that this is an essential step to ensuring that ISIS fighters are made to face justice for their crimes and preventing them from ever returning to the battlefield.  We’re talking about some battle-hardened, experienced terrorists who, if given the opportunity, would return to the fight, and it’s incumbent upon all of us to make sure that they’re not able to do so.

We assess that the most effective way to keep them off the battlefield is for countries of origin to take them back and prosecute them.  The United States has been leading by example on this issue.  We have repatriated six adults and prosecuted them for a variety of crimes, including terrorism-related crimes.  We’ve also brought home 14 children who have been put into various rehabilitation and reintegration programs.  We think that right now there is a window of opportunity for all countries who wish to move forward on this to do so.

Today, the situation in northeastern Syria seems relatively stable.  But I have to emphasize, as we all know, things can change very quickly in northeastern Syria.  And so we think that there should be a sense of urgency for countries to take advantage of this window of opportunity now, bring their folks home, and prosecute them or rehabilitate them, as the case may be.

Second, Iran has been the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism for many years, for many decades.  2018 was the year when Iran demonstrated its reach into the heart of Europe.  We saw a plot to bomb a rally outside of Paris that was to be carried out by a supposed Iranian diplomat based in Austria, using assets based here in Brussels.  We also saw an attempted assassination of an Iranian dissident living in Denmark.  These plots came on the heels of Germany’s arrest in 2018 of 10 suspected Qods Force operatives and successful assassinations by Iran in the Netherlands in 2015 and 2017.  

The threat that Iran and its terrorist proxies pose is not an abstract and hypothetical one; it is not a threat that is limited to far-off countries.  It is a threat that we face in the United States at home, and it is a threat that our European allies face here as well.  We think it is essential to impose withering economic sanctions on Iran and its proxies to deprive them of the resources they need to commit attacks around the world, and we know that our pressure campaign is working.  We know this because the secretary general of Hizballah, Hassan Nasrallah, has publicly appealed for donations.  Now that he can no longer count on the same robust financial support from his enablers in Tehran, he and his terrorist colleagues are having to raise a substantial amount of money on their own.  And that’s why we think it is essential for more countries to join the United States in sanctioning Hizballah in its entirety.  It is not an organization that can be divided neatly into a military wing and a so-called political wing.  There is no such thing as Hizballah’s political wing.  It is a terrorist organization, root and branch. 

In the United States, we have long designated the entirety of the group and we’ve been grateful in the past year to see several other countries acknowledge the reality that Hizballah is terrorist through and through.  We commend countries like the United Kingdom, Argentina, Paraguay, and others who in the past 12 months have moved forward to designate Hizballah in its entirety, and we hope that other countries will follow suit.

Question:  Ambassador, thank you for taking the time to talk today.  The New York Times and The Intercept just released a trove of secret intelligence cables from Iran’s Ministry of Intelligence and Security, and they concluded that the documents show that Iran at every turn has outmaneuvered the United States in the contest for influence in Iraq.  And I wanted to ask you if the – if you found the American invasion of Iraq empowered Iran, helping them to become, in your estimation, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism.

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, Iran has held that title since 1984 – a good two decades before the events of the early 2000s, so I don’t see a correlation there at all.  We’re aware of the report.  We’re looking at it very closely and, since it’s so new, I don’t have any particular reaction for you now.

I will say, however, that the United States policy in Iraq is for Iraq to be a free and sovereign and independent state that respects the wishes of its people, and that is free from outside malign influence.  Needless to say, that is not Iran’s vision for Iraq.  Iran’s vision for Iraq is for it to be a vassal state entirely subordinate to the will of the leaders in Tehran.

Question:  So the first question is:  How long would it take for sanctions taken against Iran to filter through Hizballah, and then separately, any sanctions taken against Hizballah to affect them directly?  And then, what kind of financial sanctions are we looking at?  And maybe thirdly, how will this help improve the situation in Lebanon, and how fast?  

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, I think we’re already seeing the effects of the sanctions on Hizballah – both the sanctions that the United States has imposed on the terror regime in Tehran, as well as the sanctions that we have imposed directly on Hizballah and its enablers and supporters and facilitators.  Hassan Nasrallah is looking at his books and realizing that he doesn’t have the same amount of support from Iran that he once had, and that’s why he’s out in public calling for contributions to make up for the shortfall.

So we’re very confident that our sanctions are already having a bite.  And the effect of that is not just some abstract effect.  It deprives Hizballah of the resources that it uses to plot terrorist attacks in the region and around the world.  We know that Hizballah is active in places like the Tri-Border region of South America.  We know that Hizballah has active facilitation networks in Africa.  We know that Hizballah has supporters and enablers in the United States, some of whom are currently being prosecuted right now.

As our financial pressure squeezes Iran and Hizballah ever more tightly, Hizballah will have to resort more and more to developing alternative sources of revenue, and that is why we are extending our sanctions campaign against this terrorist organization to deny it those resources.  

Question:  The U.S. sanctions against Iran and Hizballah stretched out to businesses in Belgium.  Are these sanctions being upheld by Belgian and E.U. authorities?  If yes or no, what is your position?

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, the United States has been very clear that any company that chooses to do business with Iran in violation of our sanctions runs the risk of being subjected to secondary sanctions in the United States.  And as a result of that message, we’ve seen companies begin to vote with their feet.  They recognize that it’s much more lucrative to them to be able to do business in the United States than it is to do business in Iran, and we’re seeing the results.  

So I would renew today the message that we have delivered consistently over the past 12 to 18 months:  If you do business with the mullahs, if you provide a financial lifeline to Tehran in violation of U.S. sanctions, you run the risk of being sanctioned yourself.  We encourage all companies to avoid going down that road.

Question:  Thank you for the questions.  Just going back to the earlier point about the ISIS returnees, repatriating ISIS fighters and their families, here in Germany and across Europe there is a massive issue with that because prosecutors are often unable to gather evidence, obviously, because the crimes will have taken place in a conflict zone.  And quite often, they don’t even – they can’t prosecute these people and they’re let loose.  Is there any help that you could provide, or do you have any position on that critical issue? And going forward, is there any kind of vision for an international tribunal or that sort of thing that – where these people could be put on trial and which would be given powers to investigate in these difficult regions? 

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, we think that prosecution in national-level courts is the best approach.  National-level courts have an established track record of being able to deliver justice and accountability in terrorism cases that international tribunals simply can’t match.  We think if we tried to stand up an international tribunal to deal with 2,000 ISIS fighters in Syria who have been captured by Syrian Democratic Forces, that would take billions of dollars, it would take many years, even decades, to process all of the fighters and pursue their appeals.  And it’s simply not a viable option to take on that kind of financial burden that would drag out over so many years.  We simply don’t have that kind of time.  We need to prosecute these fighters now. 

On the question of evidence, I can tell you that the United States has been actively supporting our partners by providing evidence to them that our soldiers have taken off the battlefield.  We have prepared detailed dossiers – we call them detainee summary packages – that we have handed off to countries of origin as they have repatriated their fighters.  And I can tell you that these dossiers of evidence have proven extremely valuable to countries that have prosecuted their fighters, it’s enabled them to put these folks behind bars for lengthy terms to make sure they can’t return to the battlefield.  And we’re prepared to continue to provide that kind of assistance to any other country that wants to take its fighters back and put them in jail.

Question:  Iranians are trying to acquire private and public sector companies in Syria to extend their influence and take over the reconstruction of Syria.  If this happens in the future, what are you doing to limit Iran’s influence in Syria?

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, thanks for the question.  Our policy in Syria has been consistent over the years and I’m happy to reiterate it now.  We want to accomplish three things in Syria.  First of all, to ensure the enduring and lasting defeat of ISIS.  We’ve destroyed the physical caliphate, so-called caliphate, and now we all have an obligation to make sure that ISIS cannot ever reconstitute itself.

Second, our policy is to minimize Iran’s malign influence in Syria.  We’ve seen the instability that Iran brings when it wraps its tentacles around another country.  We’ve seen it in Lebanon.  We’re seeing it in Iraq.  We don’t want to see it in Syria.  

And third, our – the third pillar of our Syria policy is to bring about an end to the fighting and a political resolution consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 2254, a resolution in which all stakeholders in Syria have a say in the outcome of the political resolution.

Question:  It was reported in The Washington Post last month that the U.S. had taken custody of two British men, Alexanda Kotey and El Shafee Elsheikh, in Iraq.  I wonder if you can confirm that, and if you can tell us whether you have had any joy from the British authorities on taking back these and other prisoners, especially when you have the difficult issue of some of them being stateless, having had their passports canceled.

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Right.  I don’t have any updates for you on the two men you mentioned, the so-called Beatles.  The United States position has been the countries of origin are in the best position to prosecute fighters, and we don’t think that it is an effective solution for fighters to have their citizenship removed.  As an example, I would simply point to Usama bin Ladin, whose citizenship was stripped in the 1990s, and that did nothing – his Saudi citizenship was stripped in the 1990s, and that did nothing to prevent him from committing the worst terrorist attacks in U.S. history on 9/11.  So we think the most effective approach is prosecution in countries of origin.  

With respect to the Beatles, I can’t get into the details of their particular case because of the possibility of prosecution, but rest assured that the United States is working very closely with the UK to ensure that these two very dangerous men are never able to return to the battlefield.  

Ambassador-at-Large Sales:  Well, regardless of what specific role NATO as an institution would play, I think that all NATO members have an interest in protecting themselves from the terrorist threat that Iran poses.  Iran and its terrorist proxies, like Hizballah, are active all over the world.  I mentioned a couple of recent plots in Europe – the plot against a political rally outside of Paris last year, Germany’s arrest last year of 10 suspected Qods Force operatives, assassinations in the Netherlands carried out by Iran in 2015 and 2017.  This is why we think that all like-minded countries should band together to do what they can to counter Iran-sponsored terrorism.

The United States this year designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps, including its Qods Force, as a foreign terrorist organization.  It’s the first time we’ve ever used that authority against a state entity, and it reflects how deeply committed Iran as a regime is to the use of terrorism as a basic tool of statecraft.  We’d like to see other countries join us in bringing to bear maximum economic and diplomatic pressure to force Iran to abandon terrorism as a basic tool of statecraft.

November 19, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

Read Full Text Judgment: Ayodhya Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid title dispute Case

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 15, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Hon’ble Supreme Court has pronounced Judgment on 9th November, 2019 in matter of Ayodhya Ram Mandir-Babjri Masjid Case i.e, M.SIDDIQ (D) THR. LRS. VS. MAHANT SURESH DAS & ORS. and Connected Matters.

A Constitution Bench comprising of CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice SA Bobde, Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice Abdul Nazeer on November 9 has delivered its judgment in the cross-appeals filed by the Hindu and Muslim sides challenging the three-way partition of the disputed 2.77 acres of Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land among Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Waqf Board in September 2010.

In a unanimous judgment, the Bench has ordered that a temple must be constructed at the disputed site and the Muslims must be compensated with five acres of land at a prominent place in Ayodhya. The court also ordered the Central government to formulate a scheme within three months to implement this order.

Quoting the ASI report, the Bench says theunderlying structure in the disputed site was not of Islamic origin, however the report does not support whether the temple was demolished, the Bench says.

The court also says the mosque was not built on a vacant land, as claimed by the Muslim parties. There is clear evidence the Hindus believed Ram was born in the disputed site, the CJI say. There is evidence that Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi was worshipped by the Hindus even before the British came. However, travelogues and gazetteers cannot be the basis of adjudication of title, the Bench says.

The mosque was neither abandoned nor seceded by the Muslims, the court observes. However, the court says the Muslims could not prove exclusive possession of the property.

The main points of the judgment are as follows:

(i) In one of the most important judgements in India’s history, a 5-Member Bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi unanimously put an end to more than a century old dispute that has torn the social fabric of the nation.

 (ii) Judgment is based on law and not on faith;

(iii) Judgment took into account archaeological evidence from the site, presented by Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which establishes that a pre-existing structure that was not Islamic underlies the disputed structure. The judgment ruled that ASI credentials are beyond doubt.  The Supreme Court of India gave the verdict on the basis of multiple pieces of evidence including inter alia i) report of survey and excavation on the site carried out by ASI; ii) historical records including pre-colonial travellers’ accounts and government records from the British colonial period; and iii) the evidence and material presented by all claimants to the Title Suit through the prolonged judicial process since the Independence of India;

(iv) The Title is in favour of Ram Lalla Deity. The court held that Ram Lalla Deity is a juristic entity in accordance with Indian law. The property will be handed over to a Trust, formed by the Centre within three months, which will build the Temple; and

(v) An alternate 5-acres land will be allotted to the Sunni Waqf Boardfor construction of a Mosque in Ayodhya. 

3. Prime Minister of India Shri Narendra Modi addressed the nation over the verdict, stating that there is no space for negativity, bitterness and fear in new India. He also praised the country’s judicial system for its willpower and hailed the verdict highlighting that it had amicably ended the decades-old dispute. PM Modi called for peace and harmony in the country adding that the verdict should not be seen as a win or loss for anybody.

November 15, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Economics

Appointment of members to the Committee in Norges Bank

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 15, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The King in Council has today appointed Professor Ingvild Almås and economist Jeanette Strøm Fjære as external members of the new committee on monetary policy and financial stability in Norges Bank. Also, Deputy Governor Jon Nicolaisen and Deputy Governor Egil Matsen are appointed as first and second deputy chairs, respectively, of the Committee.

The new Monetary Policy and Financial Stability Committee will be established January 1 2020, when the new Central Bank Act enters into force.  The Committee will be responsible for Norges Bank’s role as the executive and advisory monetary policy authority and contribute to the promotion of financial stability.  The Committee will consist of five members: the Governor, the two Deputy Governors and two external members. The Governor is the chair of the Committee.

The King in Council has today appointed the external members of the Committee. First and second deputy chair of the committee are also appointed among the deputy governors, according to new central bank act.

Almås is Professor at Stockholm University and Professor II at NHH, and is appointed for the period January 1 2020 – December 31 2021. Strøm Fjære is currently an economist at DNB Markets, and will start her PhD studies at the hosing research centre HousingLab at OsloMet from January 1 2020. She is appointed for the period January 1 2020 – December 31 2023. Different periods of appointment for the external members will ensure continuity at later appointments.

“Monetary policy is now the responsibility of a separate committee. This strengthens the governance structure of Norges Bank. I am certain that the Committee will be well equipped to perform its duties with Ingvild Almås and Jeanette Strøm Fjære as external members”, says Minister of Finance Siv Jensen.

As of January 1 2020 the Committee will consist of:

  • Chair: Governor Øystein Olsen
  • First deputy chair: Deputy Governor Jon Nicolaisen
  • Second deputy chair: Deputy Governor Egil Matsen
  • Member: Professor Ingvild Almås, Bergen. Appointment period is January 1 2020 –December 31 2021
  • Member: Economist Jeanette Strøm Fjære, Oslo. Appointment period is January 1 2020 – December 31 2023
November 15, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Norwegian Aid

Norway increases funding for sexuality education by NOK 75 million

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 15, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The NOK 75 million in funding will be disbursed during the period 2019–2021 and will be used to support the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) work on comprehensive sexuality education.

‘Girls and boys need knowledge about their bodies, relationships and living together as well as about health and rights if they are to make good choices and develop positive relationships. This is why Norway is increasing funding for comprehensive sexuality education by NOK 75 million,’ said Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein.

Sexuality education can also promote gender equality and play a part in developing an inclusive learning environment, which will improve school attendance by girls. Image Credit: Flickr

The NOK 75 million in funding will be disbursed during the period 2019–2021 and will be used to support the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) work on comprehensive sexuality education. The funding will be allocated to UNESCO’s global campaign in this field and to promoting sexuality education in four priority countries: Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and South Sudan.

A cooperation agreement between Norway and UNESCO is to be signed today at UNESCO’s General Conference in Paris. Minister of Research and Higher Education Iselin Nybø, who is responsible for Norway’s cooperation with UNESCO, will sign on behalf of Norway, and Director-General Audrey Azoulay on behalf of UNESCO.

‘Our support to UNESCO will contribute to achieving the sustainable development goals on good health, gender equality and quality education for everyone. Comprehensive sexuality education can boost the number of children and young people completing their schooling. I am pleased that Norway is supporting UNESCO’s efforts and its leadership in this important field,’ said Ms. Nybø.

‘Ensuring that comprehensive sexuality education is available is crucial for improving young people’s knowledge about their bodies, relationships, rights, and sexual health. Sexuality education can help to break the stigma around menstruation and prevent unplanned pregnancies, abortions and sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV,’ said Mr. Ulstein.

Sexuality education can also promote gender equality and play a part in developing an inclusive learning environment, which will improve school attendance by girls. The Norwegian Government, therefore, considers it important that comprehensive sexuality education is included in primary and secondary school curriculums and also made available for children and adolescents who do not attend school. In addition, Norway will emphasize that vulnerable groups such as children and young people with disabilities must be able to take part in sexuality education.

November 15, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Environment

Norway’s government back in court for climate lawsuit

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 12, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Greenpeace Nordic and Nature and Youth in Norway are today again taking the Norwegian government to Oslo’s Court of Appeal for opening up new oil drilling in the Arctic. 

“Right now climate change is contributing to intensifying wildfires, droughts, hurricanes and heatwaves and causing deaths around the world. The Norwegian Government can no longer ignore the dangerous impact its exported oil is having on the climate. Climate change knows no borders. Oil is oil, no matter where it is burned, and the government needs to cancel all drilling for new oil in the Arctic. Not acting now violates the Paris Agreement and Norway’s own constitution, that is why we are back in court,” said Frode Pleym, head of Greenpeace Norway.

Norway is the 7th biggest exporter of climate-wrecking emissions on the planet, and the country is drilling more oil wells than ever before. [1] [2] Compared to 2018 Norway is forecasting a 16% upsurge with drilling 130 wells in 2019. Norway’s total exported greenhouse gas emissions are ten times bigger than the domestic emissions from its production.

“It’s deeply concerning to see the Norwegian government bury its head in the sand and failing its climate commitments while drilling for more of the oil that has caused the climate crisis. It is the government’s obligation to safeguard a safe and healthy environment. The young generation, in Norway and all over the world, is worried about the prospect of an unsafe future, if governments like the Norwegian can get away with harming the climate and people’s lives. Because of this people are taking climate actions in streets and in courtrooms around the world, and we are full of optimism when we are claiming climate justice in court,” said Gaute Eiterjord, head of Nature & Youth in Norway. 

The co-plaintiffs are backed by the interveners Grandparents Climate Campaign and Friends of the Earth Norway when their appeal of the historic climate lawsuit opens today. The coalition accuses the government’s granting of oil licenses of violating the Paris Agreement and the people’s fundamental right to a safe and healthy environment as required by the Norwegian constitution. 

The UN Special Rapporteur on human rights and the environment, David Boyd, has recently criticised the Norwegian government’s expansion of oil, and he is calling for an end to Norway’s search for new oil. With the filing of a report on Norway’s energy policies and the protection of human rights and the environment, David Boyd is stressing: 

“Norway should stop exploring for additional oil and gas reserves, stop expanding fossil fuel infrastructure, and harness Norwegian wealth and ingenuity to plan a just transition to a fossil-fuel free economy. Norway, as one of the world’s wealthiest nations and one of the world’s leading producers of oil and gas, must accept substantial responsibility for leading efforts in mitigation, adaptation, and addressing loss and damage.”

Read David Boyd’s full statement here.

Media briefing: here

Legal documents: here

It’s the first case to challenge the drilling for oil and gas based on the Paris Agreement, and it is the first time the rights contained in Norwegian Constitutional Article §112 is invoked in court.

The plaintiffs have filed the legal case against the Norwegian government for granting oil licenses to 13 companies in the 23rd licensing in the Barents Sea.

The oil companies are: Equinor (formerly Statoil, Norway), Capricorn, Tullow and Centrica (UK), Chevron and ConocoPhillips (USA), DEA (Germany), Aker BP (Norway), Idemitsu (Japan), Lukoil (Russia), Lundin Petroleum (Sweden), OMV (Austria), PGNiG (Norway/Poland). 

Since the lawsuit was filed, Chevron and Tullow Oil Norge have sold their share in the licenses. Centrica Resources and Bayerngaz Norge have merged into Spirit Energy.

[1]https://storage.googleapis.com/planet4-norway-stateless/2019/04/85e38148-85e38148-oci-the-skys-limit-norway-report-norwegian-03.pdf

[2] https://fortune.com/2019/10/18/norway-drilling-climate-oil-and-gas/

November 12, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Farming

Norway salmon firms face 40 per cent tax hit

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 12, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

NORWAY’S fish farming companies face the unpalatable prospect of a new 40 per cent basic tax rate on their profits.

That is the main majority recommendation from the special committee chaired by economics professor Karen Helene Ulltveit-Moe as she presented her plans this morning.

The decision of the committee, which was set up last year to examine new tax proposals for aquaculture, has not gone down well with the industry, which said it will decimate future investment plans.

The 40 per cent rate is thought to be in line with what was imposed on the power and hydrocarbon industry recently.

However, the committee was divided on its proposals and there is speculation as to whether a Conservative led coalition government is likely to implement the full recommendations that have been described as Marxist.

Professor Ulltveit-Moe told this morning’s presentation: ‘The aquaculture industry is spending money on the community’s natural resources, and then the community must also get something back.’

Six of the nine members on the committee have voted in favour of the proposal. The Norwegian seafood website ilaks.no said the recommendation ‘oozes Marxism’.

Speaking on behalf of the some of the seafood companies, spokesman Robert Eriksson said that if the plan went through, then aquaculture would be burdened by a special tax, adding that many rural districts would be hit hard.

‘This is hostile politics for the districts and will effectively cut off the branches that make up the aquaculture tree,’ he added.

deneme bonusu veren siteler

While industry headlines are often dominated by large international names, such as Mowi and Grieg, most of the 174 salmon companies that make up the industry in Norway are small or medium sized.

So far there is no specific mention of the Aquaculture Fund which supports rural communities, but Seafood Norway CEO Geir Ove Ystmark fears it could spell the end of the scheme.

Seafood and fisheries minister Harald T Nesvik has yet to comment.

November 12, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Oil & Gas

NOK 245 billion in net revenue from the petroleum industry in 2020

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 11, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The Norwegian State’s net cash flow from the petroleum industry in 2020 is estimated to about NOK 245 billion.

The fields on the Norwegian continental shelf cover around two per cent of the world’s oil demand and three per cent of the world’s consumption of gas. The activity on the shelf today is high, which is necessary to maintain value creation, government revenues and employment over time.

New fields are expected to start in the next few years. The Sverdrup and Castberg fields in particular will contribute to an increase in total production, as the new fields more than compensate for natural decline in production in existing fields. In 2023, total production from the Norwegian continental shelf is expected to hit the record high levels from 2004.

– The petroleum sector is Norway’s biggest industry and the most important contributor to the financing of the welfare state. For the foreseeable future it will remain our largest industry in terms of revenue, value creation, investment and the number of jobs. This is due to a policy that stimulates new fields to bbe discovered, and resources that can replace existing, depleting fields, says Minister of Petroleum and Energy, Mr. Kjell-Børge Freiberg.

The state’s net cash flow from the petroleum activities is estimated in the national budget at NOK 238 billion in 2019 and NOK 245 billion in 2020. The revenues include taxes, revenues from the state’s direct financial commitment (SDFI) and dividends from Equinor. In 2020, the estimated net cash flow from the shelf will increase the transfer to the oil fund equivalent to NOK 185,000 for a family of four.

This figure includes direct and indirect taxes, revenues from the State’s Direct Financial Interest (SDFI) and dividends from Equinor.

The opportunities on the Norwegian continental shelf are still great. Of the total recoverable resources of 15.6 billion standard cubic meters of oil equivalent, only 47 percent were sold and delivered at the end of 2018.

– The activity level on the Norwegian continental shelf in terms of exploration, development and operation is at a high level. We expect it to remain so over the coming years. This is a high-tech industry. The fact that the oil companies continue to invest in exploration and further extraction of petroleum has positive learning and productivity effects, not only between supplier companies within the industry, but also between companies in the petroleum industry and other parts of the economy. It contributes to a broader, more robust and knowledgeable business structure, says Freiberg.

Investments on the Norwegian continental shelf are expected to be around NOK 173 billion in 2020. The total investment base constitutes just under one fifth of the total real investment in Norway. In the following years, a slight decline in investment is expected. From a historical perspective, they are still expected to remain at a high level. Today, there are 85 fields in production, and significant investments are made in existing fields so that the recovery rate increases and the service life is extended. In the longer term, the level of activity depends on continuously making new discoveries.

November 11, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Norway increases support for crisis-hit population of South Sudan

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 11, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The humanitarian situation for people in South Sudan is dire. According to the UN, 7.2 million people are in need of humanitarian aid. ‘The humanitarian crisis has now been exacerbated by heavy rains and floods. Norway is therefore increasing its humanitarian assistance by NOK 30 million to help save lives and meet basic needs,’ said Minister of Foreign Affairs Ine Eriksen Søreide.

For many years, Norway has given high priority to the humanitarian crises in South Sudan. This most recent contribution brings Norway’s total allocation to humanitarian aid in the country and support for South Sudanese refugees in neighbouring countries to a total of NOK 172 million. In addition, Norway has provided around NOK 11 million through the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF).  

The UN estimates that nearly one million people have been affected by flooding in several areas in the eastern and northeastern parts of the country. The needs for shelter, clean water, food, and medicines are acute, but at present humanitarian actors do not have access to many of the affected areas. It is difficult, and in some places impossible, to reach many villages and camps for refugees and internally displaced people due to the flooding of roads and airstrips. Several UN bases and the offices of several humanitarian organisations are also flooded.

‘Norway’s humanitarian assistance will help to save lives and alleviate need both in areas that are badly affected by the flooding and in other areas where there are major humanitarian needs after many years of armed conflict. It is crucial that the local authorities and humanitarian actors cooperate closely to ensure that aid reaches those who need it most,’ said Ms Eriksen Søreide.

deneme bonusu

Norway’s support will be channelled through humanitarian actors that are present in South Sudan and can respond to the humanitarian needs rapidly and effectively.

November 11, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Defence

Norway declares IOC for F-35A

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 10, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

On November 6th 2019 Norwegian air chief Major General Tonje Skinnarland declared Norway’s F-35As operational, after completing a deployment in November meant to validate that they are able to operate the jets away from Norway’s home base, Ørland Main Air Station.

Norway becomes the third European country to declare IOC, after the United Kingdom and Italy.

– I would like to congratulate the Norwegian Armed Forces on declaring IOC with the F-35. This is a big day for the entire Armed Forces, says Norway’s Defence Minister Frank Bakke-Jensen.

Norway declared F-35A IOC on November 6th 2019. Here from Rygge Air Force Base close to Oslo. Credit: Torbjørn Kjosvold, Armed Forces Norway

With more than 455 aircraft operating from 20 bases around the globe, the F-35 is playing a critical role in today’s global security environment. More than 955 pilots and 8,485 maintainers have been trained, and the F-35 fleet has surpassed more than 230,000 cumulative flight hours. Nine nations have F-35s operating from a base on their home soil and eight Services have declared Initial Operating Capability.

Over the last two years, the Norwegian Air Force has conducted intensive operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) of special Norwegian conditions such as winter operations, operations in the northern areas and cooperation with Norwegian Army, Navy and Special Forces.

To conclude the test period, the Norwegian Armed Forces spent several days transferring aircraft and equipment from Ørland Air Station to Rygge Air Station (close to the capital Oslo). Deployment of Rygge’s fighter aircraft system includes technicians and other important personnel as well as necessary equipment in order to train and practice operations from there. This was the first time the fighter aircraft were operated from a base other than Ørland Air Station.

Next year Norway’s F-35s will deploy to Iceland to conduct air-policing efforts on behalf of NATO. Finally, by 2022, the Norwegian Air Force will have built up enough F-35s, pilots and maintainers in the country to let the F-35 take over the “quick reaction alert” mission, which calls for operators to stand on a 24/7 alert and scramble, if needed, to intercept aircraft flying near Norwegian airspace. These F-35s will be ready for air-policing in Evenes, Northern Norway. 

Facts: 

  • Norway has declared F-35 initial operating capability (IOC) Nov. 6th 2019.
  • Norway plans to buy 52 F-35As. They are based in Ørland Air Station (main location) and from 2022 also in Evenes Air Station (for NATO air-policing).
  • Norway becomes the third European country to declare F-35 IOC, after the United Kingdom and Italy.
  • From 2022 Norwegian F-35As will take over the NATO QRA in Evenes. This calls for operators to stand on a 24/7 alert and scramble, if needed, to intercept aircraft flying near Norwegian airspace.
November 10, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Russia In Africa: No Issue If Firms Have Shared Values – US State Department

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 10, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The United States does not see presence of Russian companies in Africa as a matter of concern as long as it agrees with their behavior on the ground, Francis R. Fannon, US Assistant secretary of state for energy resources, said Friday.

“I don’t think it’s a matter of concern.

I think it’s a matter of what are they doing. Our concern would not necessarily be tied to the country from which any company hails but what is their behavior in the country,” Fannon told reporters, when asked if the United States was concerned over increased Russian presence in the African natural resource sector.

According to the US official, “there shouldn’t be any issue” if a company subscribes to the values of shared benefits and transparency and has similar ideals.

Below is a full rush transcript of the press conference with Assistant Secretary Francis R. Fannon , Bureau of Energy Resources. 

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Thank you.  Delighted to be here in Botswana.  This is to the end of my week in Southern Africa.  I started off in Cape Town at Africa Oil Week.  I was delighted to be back there.  I went there several years ago in a private capacity, and to be in this one, it was great to be back.  

Then I moved to Namibia and, now, in Botswana.  The purpose coming to both countries is in regards to our new initiative: the Energy Resources Governance Initiative.  We formed ERGI with a couple of countries.  First, we recognize that the world is increasingly demanding cleaner forms of energy.  This is really a bottoms-up phenomenon that makes it credible, meaningful, and to scale.  Of course, the world will require 50 percent more energy in 2040 than we produce today and an increasing percentage of that drive for electricity is for cleaner forms. 

Cleaner forms of energy are minerals-intensive.  The World Bank did a report in 2017, which I would encourage everyone to take a look at, which posed a question, “What if the world were to achieve a two-degree scenario?  What would that mean for renewables and battery storage and other renewable energy technologies, and by implications, the demand for minerals?”  They had some pretty fantastic projections on how demand will increase.  

The United States has ongoing work bilaterally with a variety of mineral-rich countries to help them develop their own capacity to develop those mineral resources sustainably and responsibly.  We work in partnership with countries in that cause.  That work continues.  But we also recognize that the United States, who has one of the best – is a leading producer in terms of best practice – well, we’re not the only ones.  There are others around the world who also have a good story to tell.

And so we convened a few other countries together, spanning four different continents, to come together and identify why have our respective countries been successful over the longer term to responsibly, sustainably develop our resources, provide an economic engine to our communities, do it sustainably, and also to ensure that there’s a shared-value concept – that everyone gets a benefit.  That work, again, we’re not the only ones who do it.  So we identified some countries who have a track record: Australia, Canada, Peru, and Botswana have all demonstrated this ability over the longer term and have a very strong record of responsible sourcing.  Ways that we’re coming together to develop what is best practice regardless of our very distinct cultures, histories, and regulatory environments.  But we believe strongly that there will be a shared sense of best practice, we’ll identify what those are, and then develop means to share that story, to share that road map, that tool kit, to other countries who similarly would like to develop their economies to be able to provide the minerals that will fuel the clean energy technology of today and to years into the future.  That’s the idea.

I was in Namibia.  We talked about their potential, also their needs for energy domestically.  Botswana, again, one of the strongest track records in terms of their own mining industry. But also they have some very near term and pressing needs to develop their own indigenous energy.  So we’ve had the ERGI conversations as well as the bilateral conversations.  I would note that the – a new administration here in Botswana has a strong mandate to proceed with a five-year term, and also part of that, their victory was based around governance-related issues.  So there’s clearly a line with the domestic agenda as well as the international agenda.  

Question:  if you could explain just a little bit more about the Energy Resource Governance Initiative, and perhaps describe which countries are part of that, and how does participation benefit them?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Well, the countries that are currently – we described as one of the founding partners would be Peru, Canada, Australia, and Botswana.  And we’re currently in discussions to formalize this agreement so that our respective countries have a shared sense of commitment going forward, so that is ongoing.  Those discussions are ongoing and we hope to have some pretty significant announcements in the relative near term.  

What this concept is about is looking at the drive for clean energy technologies.  We all see investor-related environment social governance and related pressures of corporates around the world when it comes to issues with respect to climate change and greenhouse gas emissions.  There will be, and we’re starting to see, similar kind of public pressure, scrutiny around the minerals that go into products.  The worst thing that can occur to any country, especially one that is in need of developing their economy through mineral development, is for the global supply chain to declare them as an unfavorable supplier.  That’s bad for the economy of that country, it’s bad for the supply chain globally, and the ability to meet the demand for cleaner forms of energy for all of us.  So what we’re seeking to do is work in partnership with countries that want this support through this multi-country frame.  

Now, what does this give – what does the opportunity give for the founding partners?  First, it provides a key mechanism through government-to-government multilateral frameworks to discuss regulatory structures and best practice and areas to avoid.  It allows for them, as already leaders, to be recognized as such in the global community and allows them to encourage others around the world to similarly responsibly develop their resources.  We believe that together we will be able to improve the conditions of the world, and I’m sure that issues that are immediate, like human rights, ecological destruction, areas of any modern slavery, these will all be shared.  These are principles that our countries have already ascribed to do, and so we’re already committed to their expansion globally.  

Question:  Do you see increased Russian presence in Africa’s natural resources sector?  Is this a matter of concern?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  I can’t speak to whether I’ve seen a necessary increase.  I haven’t – an increase from when.  But the issue of it being a matter of concern, I don’t think it’s a matter of concern, I think it’s a matter of what are they doing?  The issue isn’t – our concern wouldn’t be necessarily tied to the country from which any company hails, but what is their behavior in a country.  And what I think we all need to ascribe to is to stand up for the shared values that we’re talking about and the concept of shared benefit, shared value, transparency, and similar ideals.  And if any company from wherever they came ascribes for such values, then there shouldn’t be any issue. 

Question:  Where within Africa are the State Department’s highest priority areas as regards energy?  How does the Trump administration hope to achieve those priorities?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Well, let me speak to what we do at the State Department.  I focus on – the State Department, obviously, is not a technical agency.  We – in my bureau, the Bureau of Energy Resources, we focus on where energy is really a bigger issue, a matter – and it affects foreign policy.  So what do I mean?  Energy is more than just BTUs of barrels.  Energy is foundational to the economic development of a society or to a country.  It empowers business, it empowers progress and human capital.  Energy is foundational to political stability. 

As such, what we do is we partner – and I mean partner – with countries around the world based on their own self-determined pathway.  Where do they want to go; what is their ambition?  And we work cooperatively with governments to help them to achieve it.  When it comes to Africa, we see great promise in a lot of domains and we see increasing level of interest from the U.S. private sector in Africa, and we want to make sure that they’re – of course, they’re successful, but the countries are successful.

I just spoke at Africa Oil Week a few days ago, and in my remarks I mentioned – I noted that globally – part of our global [inaudible] – everywhere I go, every minister, head of state, or other public officials all have one thing in common:  They all said they want more U.S. investment.  And so what we try to do is talk to 

governments who want to see that U.S. investment how to create the appropriate incentives to business climate to attract U.S. business.  So those are bilateral diplomatic conversations we have on a routine basis and those are continuing.  We’re not prescriptive in the type of energy in which we’re focused on.  Again, we work with partnership with countries based on their self-determination.  

Question:  I’m wondering if you can speak to the what seems in some ways a contradiction.  Reuters was reporting from the Oil Week conference that a number of ministers from Africa and oil-producing countries were saying they’re unapologetic for developing the oil resources, that it’s a source of jobs, it’s a way to combat poverty, and global warming concerns are secondary.  You sound like you’re – the United States policy is much more focused on encouraging use of renewables because of awareness about fossil fuel’s contributions to climate change.  At the same time, the U.S. has just withdrawn from the Paris Climate Accords.  It’s, to me, a confusing picture.  Can you help sort that out?  

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Sure.  We work – and I met with many, many ministers in Africa Oil Week.  We go to these events because they’re pretty time efficient – you can talk to a lot of people.  They certainly would like to develop their oil and gas resources, but they also want to develop their indigenous energy of all types.  We have ongoing programs where we help them to do just that. 

There’s considerable interest in solar.  I’m here in Botswana and I was in Namibia before – they have considerable solar resource potential and they want to develop it.  A lot of challenges that they have on why they’re not able to develop it tend to be the issues with respect to the way regulatory structures have been framed, and they’re kind of new to the game.  I think it’s a great opportunity for them to do just that.  

The issue about is it – is development of a hydrocarbon is inconsistent with renewables I think is a false premise.  A few months ago, or maybe a month and a half ago, I was in New Delhi and I was there working with a program under an existing program we have focused on clean energy.  Prime Minister Modi has very ambitious renewable energy targets.  He’s doing pretty well on capacity, their government is, but they have a variety of discordant policies otherwise that is holding them back in some forms of utilization.  I was there with the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to expand the aperture of clean energy to consider flexible resources.  When you see renewables deployed at scale, natural gas tends to be the foundation upon which renewables are built because it can address the interoperability of – and the intermittency that renewables present.

So I think it’s the notion of fossil – hydrocarbon-based fuels – forms of energy with renewables, and I see them completely complimentary.  And they are reinforcing one another.  What we’re seeing here is the drive for – if the world demands cleaner forms of energy, non-hydrocarbon-based, which we certainly are seeing again from a bottoms up, then it’s going to drive minerals extraction.  And we want to ensure that the countries that would like to develop their minerals resource do so responsibly based on what they want to do.  Thank you.

Question:   If you could just explain – could the launch of this initiative, the Energy Resources Governance Initiative, could that be interpreted as a response to the recent threat by China to reduce exports of rare earth elements to the U.S.?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Yeah, thanks for the question.  Backing up, I don’t think the issue of resources – critical minerals, however one wants to scope it – is related to anything recent with respect to China.

The President issued at the outset an executive order directing there to be a review of critical minerals in the United States.  This is a big bucket of resources.  I think we’ve identified 35 different resources that go into all manner of components and defense logistics.  Of course, energy is a part – rare earth is a part of that.

But this was something that was initiated some years ago.  There was a subsequent critical minerals report that was issued, which identified some opportunities to develop a domestic – U.S. domestic supply chain to ensure that these 35 minerals – the demands that the U.S. has for these 35 minerals could be met.  We had bilateral discussions with the Canadians and with the Australians on both rare earth and critical minerals. These are ongoing discussions.  I don’t think they’re – there’s certainly been recognition of some – of a deficit, a domestic deficit, but I don’t think it’s necessarily in response to anything that the Chinese have done recently.

Rare earth gets a lot of attention and rightfully so because that would be one – there’s a suite of minerals in which the U.S. is – not just the U.S. but also other countries have – need to do more to develop a new supply chain.  But I think this ERGI initiative which is targeting energy-related minerals, that’s a different subset of the broader critical minerals.  We’ve identified 15 of these energy resource minerals, and that’s the focus of this initiative.  Thanks.

Question:  Does the Energy Bureau have any experience partnering with countries in Africa to improve their capacity to manage their mineral sector?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Well, we have ongoing initiatives with other countries, and those have been publicly reported on.  We have great opportunity to do so in Africa.  ERGI is a new initiative.  And what we – again, we do a partnership-based model, so we understand several countries are interested in partnering with us through ERGI, I’m sure as well as through bilateral engagements, and those discussions are ongoing.  Thanks.

Question:   Are there specific challenges as related to African countries that require particular attention?  And how do you propose your bureau address them or assist African nations in confronting those challenges?

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Yeah.  Well, what we’re hearing from some of the countries is that there’s a couple of areas.  First, there’s a lack of awareness, or I guess an increasing level of awareness of what it is that they have.  To do the type of geologic survey work to really understand the resource potential requires time and capacity, technical know-how, and money.  And so that’s one area that they are increasingly interested in better understanding, first, what they have.

And secondly, these are minerals that have only recently increased in demand, so only recently is there a market signal that’s generating, that’s catalyzing interest in development of those minerals.  So they’re all a bit playing catch-up, as well as the rest of the world, as to how to create the appropriate enabling environment for maximum development, but doing so in the right way.

And then thirdly, it I would say would go to more of the above-ground conditions.  What are the requirements that they would have to bring in private sector?  And then how do they make sure that they’re keeping pace with – and being globally competitive?  Again, they all want to see the same kind of investment and the same kind of transparent, best practice companies – companies with the strongest environment, health, safety records.  They all want that.  But there’s a global competition for that same kind of investment.  And so how do they ensure that they get the right kind of companies and the right levels of return that have the shared value concept over the long term.

A mine project – these are things that have 20 to 50-year lifespans.  They want to make sure they partner with a responsible company and with responsible partners.  So these are the kinds of conversations that we’re having.  The real positive here is that the African nations with whom we’re speaking see it.  I mean, they all see it.  They see the opportunity, and they’re really interested in expanding and deepening the partnership.

Assistant Secretary Fannon:  Look, we’re pretty passionate about ERGI concept.  I think it’s undeniable the demand, that it’s happening for forms of clean energy, renewable, solar, wind, electric vehicles, battery storage technologies.  The demand is going – it’s kind of unprecedented, and the pressure this has on minerals is significant.

As I’ve mentioned before, as clean and green as any energy technology is, it requires really big shovels at the beginning of its life cycle, and we should all be concerned and be mindful of where and how those big shovels are being deployed.  ERGI is a construct, a government-to-government initiative that seeks to ensure that there’s global clarity amongst governments as what best practice is, and then we provide the tools for other countries to incorporate them as they’d like to do.

We already know that we’re seeing signs of retailers, the end users of these minerals expressing increasing levels of concern about issues of sourcing, of human rights, of environmental harm.  And we want to make that their needs are met, that they are able to get the supply chain that they need, and also, importantly, that the countries that have the resource wealth are able to provide it and their countries can benefit.  This is really a concept built on partnership to support capacity and governance of countries.  And it’s in that spirit that we’re working across four continents to deliver that to other parts of the world.

November 10, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Racism in Norway

Norway’s Barnevernet and the future of parental rights

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 10, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

In recent weeks, it has been reported that the Norwegian authorities have taken permanent custody of three American children from their Christian parents. Natalya Shutakova, a US citizen, and her husband, Lithuanian citizen Zigintas Aleksandravicius, are now allowed to visit their children only three times per year. Sadly, this is not particularly shocking to those who have been working to protect parental rights in Europe.

It seems remarkable that this can be happening in a country that positions itself as a human rights champion. Through its Agency for Development Cooperation, Norway devotes more than $400 million per year to its priority areas, including the protection of human rights. It is therefore ironic that, despite its public efforts to protect human rights, a human rights violation it would have rather kept hidden has been exposed to the world.

The snatching of the Bodnariu children

In some ways, the story starts in 2015 with the very public removal of the five Bodnariu children—then aged nine to only three months—from their parents by the Barnevernet, Norway’s child welfare agency.

The first they knew of it was when two black cars approached their farm. A social worker told them that their daughters had been taken directly from school into emergency state care and that the parents should come to the police station to answer questions. At this point, their two older sons were also taken.

The very next day, the black cars appeared again. They were there for the baby. There was an allegation of corporal punishment (illegal in Norway) but, more concerningly, the parents’ crime seemed to be seeking to raise the children in line with their Christian faith.

There was, for example, a concern about the way the parents thought that God punishes sin—a willful mischaracterization of the Christian belief in forgiveness and salvation. According to the family, this formed part of the concerns initially raised with Barnevernet by the principal at the daughters’ school.

The idea that such a core Christian belief was even partial grounds for Barnevernet to swoop in and wrest children from the school gates prompted protests outside dozens of Norwegian embassies around the world from Barcelona to Washington.

This outcry also encouraged others to speak up. At ADF International, we were almost overwhelmed with the number of people who spoke to us of similar cases. After investigating, we became convinced that the Bodnariu case was symptomatic of serious issues with the way in which the Barnevernet was functioning.

Until this point, at the international level, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) had routinely rejected cases against Norway relating to Barnevernet, and that route of challenge looked closed. We needed to dig deep into what was happening and to ask the tough questions. We provided information to a number of European parliamentarians who sit as part of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly. The Assembly took up the issue and compiled a detailed report. The rapporteur travelled to Norway and met with senior officials and members of the Norwegian Parliament. In the end, the report was presented to the Parliamentary Assembly, which voted to adopt it.

Another case comes to the fore

Around the same time that this report was underway, the ECHR decided to accept a raft of cases filed against Norway challenging these practices. While the Bodnariu case continued to make headlines, another case was heard first. In the Lower Chamber, the ECHR ruled against Ms. Trude Strand Lobben, but the Grand Chamber agreed to review the case, setting the stage for a showdown.

This case concerned a young mother who went to the authorities for help when she was pregnant. They offered her a place in a supported family unit. A number of weeks after the birth of her son, she expressed a desire to leave. That set in motion a chain of events that would result in her son being taken away, her contact time reduced to eight hours per year, and, ultimately, her son being given up for adoption.

The ECHR hearing was held in Strasbourg in October 2018. On one side of the courtroom sat Ms. Strand Lobben and her lawyer. The inequality of arms on full display, the Norwegian government was represented in court by none other than its Attorney General supported by eight advisers. Ms. Strand Lobben waited almost a year for the ruling.

This month, she was vindicated by the Grand Chamber, which ruled that Norway had made no effort to reunite her family, as it is obliged to do. The ruling referenced the Report that had been adopted by the Parliamentary Assembly just four months before the hearing in this case. The decision marks only the third time the Grand Chamber has found Norway in violation of the European Convention—a conclusion with which thirteen of the seventeen judges agreed.

The tragedy is that this “victory” at the ECHR comes over ten years after Ms. Strand Lobben’s son was taken from her. The decision does not have the effect of reuniting mother and son, and neither the judgment nor the small sum of compensation awarded could atone for the damage done to this family.

Norway on trial

The facts of this case generally follow a now well-established—and tragic—pattern. A child is removed based on one specific concern. The parents then robustly challenge the authorities. What should be understood as a reflection of their love for their child is then used against them as demonstrating an unwillingness to work with the authorities.

That is used as grounds to prolong the separation, with the original specific concern fading into the background. Eventually, enough time passes that the authorities claim the child is now well-settled and should remain permanently with the foster family. We have seen this pattern repeat time and time again.

Thankfully, the Grand Chamber has now intervened. And it is not just the European Court of Human Rights that is taking note. Recently, Norway was subject to a four-year review of its human rights record at the United Nations in Geneva. Several states and NGOs raised concerns and made recommendations about the way in which Barnevernet has been operating.

Norway, battered by the winds of international condemnation, accepted every single recommendation made to protect children from arbitrary removal by Barnevernet and to ensure proper protection for the family.

But accepting recommendations is not enough. It needs to be followed by concrete actions that result in better protection for families. While anyone would agree that there are some cases in which the state should intervene to protect children, this needs to be rare, and based on clear evidence that a child will suffer real harm. And even after a child has been removed, the duty of the state—as the ECHR made clear—is to work vigorously toward bringing the family back together.

Parental rights under fire

Although these revelations concern Norway, it does not stand completely alone when it comes to harmful practices that undermine parents and the family. In Germany, the longstanding prohibition on homeschooling (backed by criminal penalties in some regions) was upheld earlier this year by the ECHR.

In the case of the Wunderlich family, four children were snatched from their home by more than thirty police officers in a dawn raid. They were kept for three weeks and subjected to education assessments. They performed at normal levels but were only allowed to return home after their parents promised to send them to school. This treatment, decided the ECHR, was “not implemented in a way which was particularly harsh or exceptional.”

Meanwhile, in Sweden, homeschooling is, in theory, allowed. However, permission must be sought, which is only granted under “extraordinary circumstances.” In practice, this means almost never. That was the decision of the Swedish Child and Education Board in the case of the Petersen family.

The mother and father, dual American and Swedish citizens, had educated their seven-year-old daughter at home during a three-month trip. The results were excellent and, on her return to school, it was clear she was performing at a level well above her classmates. Wanting to continue educating their daughter in this way, they sought and were refused the necessary permission.

The only way they were able to pursue the educational choice they believed to be in their daughter’s best interest was to sell almost everything they owned and relocate to the United States. That is clearly not an option available to most, and so ADF welcomed the news that the United Nations Human Rights Committee has agreed to hear this complaint earlier this year.

Even more recently, just this month, in Scotland, the government has finally announced that its beleaguered “Named Person” scheme will be dropped. Under the scheme, every child would have been given a state-appointed guardian to oversee his or her well-being.

The scheme was challenged all the way to the UK Supreme Court which, in Summer 2016, ruled that the scheme violated article 8 of the European Convention. In a telling passage, the justices wrote, “Different upbringings produce different people. The first thing that a totalitarian regime tries to do is to get at the children, to distance them from the subversive, varied influences of their families, and indoctrinate them in their rulers’ view of the world. Within limits, families must be left to bring up their children in their own way.”

For more than two years after this judgment, the Scottish government clung to its flagship initiative, suggesting this “snoopers charter” could be amended to become lawful. They have finally given up. And yet British parents cannot rest for long as, separately, Parliament has passed regulations introducing compulsory “relationships and sex education” in English schools from September 2020. Parents can withdraw their children from the sex education aspect until just before they turn 16 but have no right to opt them out of relationships education at any age.

The battle continues

Parents around the world know the profound responsibility and privilege it is to have and to raise children. And governments know the immense power of families and communities as a check on the excesses of the state. As the Universal Declaration of Human Rights puts it, the family is the “fundamental group unit” of society. Those who undermine it attack the foundation of our societies and the source of great richness and diversity.

The most generous interpretation of these attacks is that some of the policies, ostensibly aimed at protecting children, are well-intentioned, but misguided. Yet we must also be on guard for those for whom the temptation of power affords the opportunity to force their utopian vision on a future generation by sidelining parents and, ultimately, deconstructing the family.

One of the strands running through many of these threats is the legal test often used in child welfare proceedings. That test says that actions must be judged against what is in the “best interests of the child.” While that may sound attractive—who, after all, would want to act against a child’s best interests?—this nice-sounding phrase provides no real guidance to courts asked to settle a dispute between parties who both claim to be acting in the best interests of a child.

The divergent parties could be the parents; but we also often see the parents on one side, and the state on the other. That was the case for the Bodnariu parents, the parents of Charlie Gard, and for Ms. Strand Lobben. In her case, the judgment referenced this standard 122 times.

If we are to restore the place of parents, and to protect the family, we must revisit this standard. The consequences for those involved in child welfare proceedings can be more serious and long-lasting than even those involved in criminal proceedings. The standards involved must be no less exacting.

Intervention must always be a last resort, and only based on verified evidence that a child is in real danger of serious harm. Moreover, in circumstances where separation occurs, parental appeals must be dealt with expeditiously, given the way in which the status quo can quickly become ossified.

Back in Norway, things are far from over. Natalya Shutakova and Zigintas Aleksandravicius have vowed to appeal, and the Bodnariu case, filed in December 2016, is waiting for its day in court. It seems likely that it will mark another bad day for Norway, but a much-needed good day for parents and families across Europe and beyond.

Robert Clarke is a UK-qualified barrister and serves as Director of European Advocacy for ADF International from its headquarters in Vienna, Austria. This article has been republished, with permission, from Public Discourse.

November 10, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Killing

Norwegian man, 66, dies in Thailand fire

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 9, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Thailand Emergency services were called to Center Condotel South Pattaya in Nong Prue sub-district, Banglamung district, at 5am last week Friday (November 1) after reports of a fire and the death of one person.

Police and forensic investigators rushed to the scene where firefighters were attempting to put out the blaze that reportedly started in room 3/319 A6 on 9th floor. Both water hoses and chemical extinguishers were required as the apartment building is located in a narrow soi preventing the use of the fire truck’s extended ladder.

Police found the body of Stein Arne Jensen, 66, a Norwegian national on his bed and the medical examiner give a preliminary cause of death as smoke inhalation. The other 100 residents of the building managed to evacuate without injury, though all were said to be shaken by the incident. Damage to the building was estimated at around Bt500,000. The cause of the fire is being investigated.

November 9, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Killing

Morocco upholds death penalty for murder

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 8, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Death sentences have been upheld in an appeals trial for the three main defendants of the murder of Scandinavian tourists in Imlil. Judges from the counterterrorism court of appeals of Salè have also changed a life sentence given in the first trial to a fourth man who helped organise the murder but did not physically take part in it to the death penalty as well.

The death sentence continues to be handed down in Morocco but no one has actually been executed since 1993 due to a moratorium.

The Danish national Luisa Vesterager Jesperse, 24, and the Norwegian Maren Ueland, 28, were killed and beheaded while camping out during a trekking expedition on the Atlas Mountains in December 2018.

November 8, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Economics

‘Crab war’ between Norway & EU in the Arctic

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 7, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The European Union is planning to award 20 licenses for snow crab fishing near Norway’s Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, in violation of a ruling by the Norwegian Supreme Court.

According to Norway’s national broadcaster NRK, the bloc may unilaterally grant eleven licenses to Latvia, four to Lithuania, three to Poland, and one each to Estonia and Spain.

The EU argues that Norway, which is not part of the European Union, is in violation of the Svalbard Treaty because it discriminates between Norwegian and foreign fishing vessels. The 1920 international agreement guarantees Norway’s sovereignty over Svalbard, while providing opportunities for signatory countries to conduct business and fishing there. It also cements Svalbard’s status as a demilitarized zone.

Norway’s Fisheries Minister Harald Tom Nesvik insists that no one is allowed to fish for snow crab on the Norwegian continental shelf without a permit from Oslo.

“This is standard procedure. They issue these licenses to the countries that have requested them. But the EU-issued licenses don’t matter. If you want to catch snow crab, the quota from Norway applies,” Nesvik said.

According to him, the fisheries minister is not afraid of any physical contact between vessels in the Svalbard zone ahead of the fishing season. “It would be very stupid, because then they will be arrested for breaking the law. The EU is very much aware of the fact that the quotas are issued by Norway. These are licenses without significance.”

Norway believes it has exclusive rights to catch snow crab in the fisheries protection zone around the archipelago. Last winter, the Norwegian Supreme Court rejected an appeal from a Latvian shipping company. Member of the European Parliament Jarosław Wałęsa, from Poland, suggested earlier that EU fishermen are being treated like criminals in Norway.

Snow crabs reside in the North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans, preferring the deep, cold water conditions of these seas. In the Barents Sea, it was first observed by Russian scientists in 1996. Since then, a large stock has established itself around the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard as well.

November 7, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Economics

Norway wealth fund grows to record $1.09 trillion

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 6, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The value of Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, the world’s largest, grew to a record 10 trillion Norwegian crowns ($1.09 trillion) on Friday, boosted by rising global stocks and the strength of the euro and dollar.

The fund reached the milestone as its government regulators grapple with strategy changes, including how to handle climate risk and a proposed large-scale shift of investments into the United States.

The fund’s chief executive, Yngve Slyngstad, said that ‘the return on the investments in global financial markets has been so high that it can be compared to having discovered oil again.’ (AFP)

Built since 1996 to save petroleum revenues for future generations, the size of the fund has grown to almost three times that of Norway’s annual gross domestic product, far exceeding original projections.

“When the fund was set up, nobody thought it would pass 10,000 billion crowns. We were lucky to discover oil,” the fund’s chief executive, Yngve Slyngstad, said in a statement confirming the record.

“The return on the investments in global financial markets has been so high that it can be compared to having discovered oil again,” he said.

An update on the fund’s website showed the Government Pension Fund Global’s value reaching 10 trillion Norwegian crowns for the first time at 0857 GMT — more than $200,000 for every man, woman and child in Norway.

Commonly known as the oil fund and managed by a unit of the central bank, it invests close to 70 percent of funds in global equities and some 28 percent in a portfolio of fixed-income assets. Unlisted real estate holdings make up the rest.

On Aug. 27, the central bank proposed a shift that could ultimately move more than $100 billion out of European stock markets and into the United States, although such a move, if approved, could take years to complete.
The $750 billion equities portfolio has historically been heavily weighted toward Europe, aligning its fortunes with countries from which Norway draws most of its imports.

A move away from Europe would not be a verdict on the continent’s prospects, the fund insists, but would reflect a desire to apply neutral weights to global stock markets and thus make returns less dependent on a particular region.

November 6, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Norwegian Aid

Government to provide NOK 3 billion to promote cleaner oceans

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 5, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

Norway will provide more than NOK 3 billion to a number of initiatives to promote sustainable ocean management in the period 2020-2024. The initiatives will be announced at the Our Ocean conference in Oslo, which begins today.

The conference will bring together 500 world leaders and 100 youth representatives from a total of around 100 countries. They will present ideas and concrete solutions for how we can protect the oceans and make better use of marine resources.

‘We must protect the oceans from pollution, but at the same time ensure that the oceans can continue to provide us with food and energy. It will only be possible to create new jobs and new industries if we ensure sustainable management of marine areas and make use of new technology. All countries need to do more, and Norway will step up its efforts both nationally and internationally,’ said Prime Minister Erna Solberg, who will be the main speaker at the conference.

More than three billion people depend on the oceans for their livelihoods. Ocean industries contribute USD 1,5 trillion to the global economy every year. Ocean-based industries are vital for Norway too. Around 70 % of Norwegian export revenues are from ocean industries.

‘Norway’s ocean industries have an important role to play in developing and introducing new sustainable solutions both in Norway and internationally. The Government will launch 16 major initiatives with funding of more than NOK 3 billion in the period 2020-2024,’ said Ms Solberg.

Norway has played an active part in the annual Our Ocean conferences, the first of which was held in 2014. This year, the conference will be hosted by Norway, represented by Minister of Foreign Affairs Ine Eriksen Søreide.

‘The oceans provide food, energy, jobs and welfare for people all over the world. But research shows that the oceans are becoming warmer, more acidic and less salty. This is having serious consequences for marine life, fisheries, sea-level rise and weather systems. Many of these changes are taking place faster than we had expected. To deal with these challenges, we need to work together across national borders and strengthen partnerships between the business sector, research communities, authorities and organisations. This conference is an opportunity to do just that,’ said Ms Eriksen Søreide.

Minister of International Development Dag-Inge Ulstein will open the conference’s Youth Leadership Summit, which will involve 100 participants from 48 countries.

‘It is important that the voices of future leaders are heard in the discussions on climate and environmental matters. One of the issues that the young people will explore at the summit is the fight against marine litter, including plastics,’ said Mr Ulstein.

‘Norway is at the forefront of efforts to put in place a global agreement on marine litter and microplastics by 2023. This would be an important milestone in the efforts to protect the marine environment and to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals, particularly the target on reducing marine pollution,’ said Minister of Climate and Environment Ola Elvestuen.

Fisheries crime is another important theme at the conference, and Norway will highlight the importance of working towards a common ambition of a crime-free blue economy.

‘The oceans are a vital source of food, jobs and welfare. These are three of the reasons why the fight against fisheries crime is so important for Norway. Norway has responsibility for huge sea areas, and we therefore have a responsibility for drawing attention to this issue,’ said Minister of Fisheries and Seafood Harald T. Nesvik.

‘Norway also has long and valuable experience to share when it comes to the successful co-existence of oil and gas production, active fisheries and a large aquaculture sector,’ said Minister of Petroleum and Energy Kjell-Børge Freiberg.

Norway’s priorities

Climate change 

  • Support zero- and low-emission solutions in domestic shipping (NOK 100 million)
  • Establish the Green Voyage-2050 project together with the International Maritime Organization (IMO) (NOK 50 million, Ministry of Climate and Environment and Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Provide support through Enova for the Hywind Tampen project to develop a floating offshore wind farm in the North Sea (NOK 2.3 billion, Ministry of Climate and Environment)
  • Complete the pre-project for a CO2 storage facility in the North Sea (NOK 225 million, Ministry of Petroleum and Energy)

Sustainable fisheries 

  • Strengthen the Fish for Development programme (NOK 50 million, Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Provide support to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) to strengthen the capacity of developing countries to implement the Port State Measures Agreement (NOK 20 million, Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Provide support for a project on food from the oceans (NOK 20 million per year for a period of five years, Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Establish the ‘Blue Justice’ initiative to assist developing countries in combating crime in the fisheries sector (Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Not to provide subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing or benefit IUU fishing; – to continue active and constructive engagement in the fisheries subsidies negotiations in order to reach consensus on the whole mandate and successfully conclude the negotiations; – to reinvigorate our efforts to this end.

Protection of the oceans

  • Work to secure a new global agreement and establish a stronger global governance system to combat marine litter and microplastics by 2023 (Ministry of Climate and Environment and Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Cooperate with IMO and FAO under the development programme to combat marine litter (NOK 50 million, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Climate and Environment)
  • Continue the work on a plan for marine protected areas with the aim of protecting a representative selection of Norway’s coastal and marine areas (Ministry of Climate and Environment)
  • Work to secure a global ban on the persistent organic pollutants PFHxS and Dechlorane Plus (Ministry of Climate and Environment)
  • Provide reports on the marine environment based on Norway’s extensive environmental monitoring activities (Ministry of Climate and Environment)

Knowledge and skills transfer 

  • Provide support for the pre-project phase for Ocean Space Laboratories (NOK 55 million, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries)
  • Strengthen Norwegian development cooperation on ocean management through the new Oceans for Development programme (NOK 25 million)
  • Promote integrated, ecosystem-based marine management internationally, as well as sustainable ocean industries through the World Bank’s multi-donor trust fund PROBLUE (NOK 46 million, Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
  • Support the work of UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) on the UN Decade of Ocean Science (NOK 4.25 million, Ministry of Education and Research, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries and Ministry of Foreign Affairs) 
  • Support a pilot project for mapping of the seabed near the coast (NOK 85 million in the period 2020-2022 provided to counties, municipalities, the Institute of Marine Research and the Geological Survey of Norway. Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation).
November 5, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Science

New Norwegian trawler could go diesel free

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 4, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

The NordnesGruppen trawler Nordbas will feature a new bespoke hybrid power system designed by Blueday Technology which will be installed in the trawler at Kleven shipyard in Norway.

When deciding to rebuild Nordnes, NordnesGruppen decided to focus on reducing the environmental footprint of the renovated trawler and asked several companies to put forward proposals. Blueday’s design covers the ship’s automations and power system and uses the power generated by the Danish seine system’s winches to regenerate the onboard energy storage system, or battery. The innovative system will mean that Nordbas could run on 100 percent renewable electricity for up to several hours.

“Whoever has the ability has the duty – here we take a considerable responsibility when it comes to reducing our environmental footprint through reuse, energy optimisation, quality and utilisation of residual raw material” said Tormund Grimstad, General Manager of NordnesGruppen.

Mads Andreassen, Technical Superintendent at NordnesGruppen, added that Blueday Technology has experience and an excellent track record in advanced power system designs and that the company is confident that the design will meet expectations.

November 4, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Politics

Norwegian PM in Vilnius

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 4, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

During her visit in Vilnius, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg has refused to comment on a reported spy exchange deal with Russia.

She said she was aware of the fact that the Lithuanian parliament is deliberating a law detailing the president’s right to pardon individuals convicted for spying, calling it “an important and good discussion”.

“I know that there is a discussion in the Lithuanian parliament on the amendment to your pardoning laws. I think that is an important and good discussion. I don’t make comments on issues of exchange or agreements, or how the activities will be around that,” Stolberg told journalists at the Lithuanian parliament on Monday.

She said Norway would make every effort to have Norwegian Frode Berg, who has been convicted for spying in Russia, back, but refused to comment in more detail on the issue, saying that his interests should be taken into account.

The Norwegian prime minister is on Monday attending a Vilnius meeting of the leaders of the Nordic and Baltic center-right parties that belong to the European People’s Party.

The Seimas of Lithuania has already deliberated the amendment detailing the president’s right to pardon individuals convicted for spying, and one more vote is needed for it to become law.

November 4, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Africa and Norway

Nine sailors abducted off the coast of Benin

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 4, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

A Norway-based shipping company says that nine of its employees have been abducted from one of its vessels while it was moored off the coast of Benin in West Africa, BBC reports.

Shipping firm J.J. Ugland said the cargo ship, the Bonita, was attacked on Saturday by pirates 15km (9 miles) off the coast.

The crew’s identity and nationality have not been made public, but the shipping firm said the rest of the crew moved the vessel into the Port of Cotonou in Benin.

The ship was carrying a cargo of gypsum, a mineral commonly used as fertiliser, which was destined for Benin, the firm said.

While piracy has decreased world wide, West Africa’s Gulf of Guinea remains notorious for abductions by armed groups who usually demand ransoms for the safe return of victims.

Several abductions have been reported in the region in recent months, including eight crew members taken from a German-owned vessel off Cameroon in August, and 10 Turkish sailors off the coast of Nigeria in July.

November 4, 2019 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Asia and Norway

Norway and China at the Astana Club 2019 political forum

by Nadarajah Sethurupan November 4, 2019
written by Nadarajah Sethurupan

LI WEI – President (Minister) of the Development Research Center (DRC) of the State Council Chair (2011-2019), LU (MABEL) MIAO – Chairman of the Committee of Population, Resources and Environment, the National Committee of Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, HUIYAO (HENRY) WANG – Co-founder, Vice President and Secretary-General of the Center for China and Globalization (CCG),YANG CHENG -Founder and President, Center for China and Globalization (CCG), Professor, Director of School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Shanghai International Studies University will take part at the Astana Club 2019.

On November 11-12, 2019, the Nazarbayev Center will host the fifth annual meeting of the Astana Club, the largest platform for discussing geopolitical and security issues in the region. During the two-day event, experts will discuss the most important issues on the future of Eurasia and the dynamics of global processes.

The fifth meeting of the Club will be held under the title: “Greater Eurasia: On the Way to New Architecture of Global Cooperation”.

The Club’s expert discussions will focus on the current aggravated confrontation in USA-China-Russia triangle, the growth in trade protectionism and populist sentiments, as well as a new wave of escalation in Iran and North Korea.

Particular attention will be paid to shaping the future architecture of cooperation in Eurasia, as well as to finding solutions to key global security challenges, such as the issue of uncontrolled nuclear proliferation.

The next edition of the “Top 10 Risks for Eurasia in 2020” rating, a strategic foresight of leading experts from around the world published under the auspices of the Astana Club by the Institute of World Economy and Politics, will be presented during the event.

Over the course of the fifth Astana Club meeting, the following topics will be discussed:

  • “World dis(order): who will write the history of the future?”
  • “Multipolar Eurasia: the region of permanent conflicts?” 
  • “Trade wars and protectionism: what will happen to the global economy?”
  • “World technological race: a new area of global confrontation” 
  • “Nuclear disarmament: what steps to take?” 
  • “Central Asia at the junction of global interests: the pros and cons of the Heartland” 

This year more than 50 politicians, diplomats and international experts will gather in the capital of the Republic of Kazakhstan. In addition to participants form Kazakhstan and Russia, the event will be attended by participants from such countries as the USA, Spain, Italy, Japan, Serbia, Austria, Norway, China, India, Belgium, Afghanistan, Sweden, Portugal, South Korea, Egypt, Bangladesh, Slovenia, Kyrgyzstan, Great Britain, Pakistan.

The plenary meeting of the Club is the central event, which will be devoted to the discussion of the topic: “Creating Greater Eurasia: a new model for partnership“.

Key speakers of the Astana Club this year will include: 

  • Mohamed ELBARADEI, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate (2005), IAEA Director General (2013-2014), Egypt 
  • Jacob FRENKEL, Chairman of JPMorgan Chase International and Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Group of Thirty (G-30), Governor of the National Bank of Israel (1991–2000), USA
  • Jose Manuel BARROSO, President of the European Commission (2004-2014), Non-Executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs International, Portugal
  • Hamid KARZAI, President of Afghanistan (2001-2014), Afghanistan
  • Jose Luis ZAPATERO, Prime Minister of Spain (2004-2011), Spain 
  • Yves LETERME, Prime Minister of Belgium (2008, 2009-2011), Secretary General of the International IDEA Institute, Belgium
  • Shaukat AZIZ, Prime Minister of Pakistan (2004-2007), Pakistan
  • Danilo TÜRK, President of Slovenia (2007-2012), Slovenia
  • Yun BYUNG-SE, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Korea (2013-2017), South Korea
  • Franco FRATTINI, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy (2002-2004, 2008-2011), Italy
  • Mikhail FRADKOV, Director of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies, Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation (2004-2007), Director of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation (2007-2016)

The event is organized by the Institute of World Economy and Politics and the Foundation of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan – Elbasy.

The mission of the Astana Club is to bring together leading experts, political leaders and diplomats of Eurasia to form a global agenda considering Kazakhstan’s foreign policy priorities.

Traditionally, the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan-Elbasy Nursultan Nazarbayev attends the Astana Club meeting.

Some of the Astana Club meetings will be held in accordance with the Chatham house rules, meaning their closed nature and allowing for a heated and open discussion of the most urgent issues in Eurasia and in the world.

Over the years, more than 200 speakers from 40 countries have attended the Club meetings.

November 4, 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

  • India’s revived yard lands $220m Norwegian chemical tanker deal

    November 11, 2025
  • Indonesia’s Emission Reduction Efforts A Success

    November 9, 2025
  • Oslo hosts Azerbaijan’s Victory Day anniversary

    November 8, 2025
  • Norway lifts arms embargo against Cyprus

    November 8, 2025
  • Norwegian Foreign Minister visit China

    November 8, 2025
  • Chinese Buses Can Be Turned Off Remotely in Norway

    November 6, 2025

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

India’s revived yard lands $220m Norwegian chemical tanker deal
Indonesia’s Emission Reduction Efforts A Success
Oslo hosts Azerbaijan’s Victory Day anniversary
Norway lifts arms embargo against Cyprus

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