Norway urges Trump to issue predictable, clear policy on Russia

[riversedge]

Source: Reuters





Fri Dec 2, 2016 | 10:21pm


Norway on Friday urged U.S. President-elect Donald Trump to enunciate a clear and predictable policy on Russia as soon as possible, amid growing concerns in Oslo about increasing Russian military activities in the "High North" or Arctic region.

"What is most important to us right now is to have both a predictable and a very clear policy on Russia," Norwegian Defence Minister Ine Eriksen Soereide told Reuters ahead of the annual Reagan National Defense Forum in California.

"The earlier and the clearer that the new administration comes out with this, the better it is, also for European security," Soereide said.


Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg spoke by telephone with Trump on Thursday, addressing concerns of the transatlantic NATO alliance and Europe about Russia's increasingly aggressive military stance, Soereide said.

................

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-russia-nato-idUSKBN13R2RA?utm_campaign=trueAnthem:+Trending+Content&utm_content=58428abf04d3011adefa3d11&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=twitter

[FailureToCommunicate]

1. Trump: "What's "Norway"?

[StopTheNeoCons]

14. If you haven't, watch "Occupied" on netflix

If you haven't, watch "Occupied" on netflix

[petronius]

16. That was the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread

When I watched the series, I thought it was a little farfetched that the US was so disconnected and acquiescent -- now, I think it was prescient to depict the US like that...

[Solomon]

20. Thanks!

My wife and I are watching it now. Fascinating.

[Lulu KC]

18. Oh thank you

Comic relief saves the day, again!

[whistler162]

2. You do know the old song

Whatever Putin wants, Putin gets
And little nation, little Putin wants you
Make up your mind to have, no regrets
Recline yourself, resign yourself you're through

[tanyev]

3. Don't they understand that he has tremendous Russia policies?

His policies on Russia are the best. Many people call them fantastic.

[COLGATE4]

4. Note to Norway:

Good goddamn luck with that!

[lark]

5. Norway, sorry, but you are fucked.

drumpfs policy is to be bribed to the max and let Russia to whatever the fuck they want, including waging war on other countries in Europe, for his own personal gain of course. That's all drumpf wants. Norway and Europe would have to offer him more, and don't think they are like that or would do such a thing.

[lark]

6. Read the article after posting this.

1 - Think drumpf probably totally lied to them, he has no allegiance to NATO, they can't won't bribe him the way Russia has.
2 - The only way this is true is if someone has told him they'd take him out if he fucks up Europe and he believes them

My personal guess is #1.

[malthaussen]

7. Here it is: Pucker Up

I think the Baltic States have more to worry about in the immediate future.

-- Mal

[branford]

8. If I were Norway,

before making demands of Trump, I would first announce that Norway would fully commit to NATO defense spending requirements and take more responsibility for their own defense. Norway is a very rich Western country and often cited as a paragon of social democratic governance. Their failure to meet their NATO treaty obligations is inexcusable.

While Trump is a fool without diplomatic skills, both he and Obama actually agree that NATO members must shoulder their agreed upon financial, manpower and resource commitments to the organization. Right now, only four countries besides the USA do so, and thus American blood and treasure are disproportionately at stake in any dispute with Russia or anyone else.

http://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2016_07/20160704_160704-pr2016-116.pdf
http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/15/news/nato-spending-countries/

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

9. Do you mean like this...

... "Norway announced plans last week to buy five Boeing Co P-8A maritime surveillance planes that it could use to better track Russian submarines, cooperating closely with Britain, which is buying nine of the planes."...?

Just wondering...


PS: See OP for link

[branford]

11. The five planes are barely a start, and really only highlight how Norway failed to dedicate

necessary resources and manpower during the last few years of Russian aggression.

However, you'll notice that after Trump's comments, many of our purported NATO allies and now very conspicuously discussing how they might better contribute to NATO defense. This is not just coincidence.

While I believe Trumps NATO"s comments were ill-phrased and arguably counterproductive to overall world stability, they certainly have had much more of a tangible response that President Obama's mild comments about NATO funding mere weeks before Trump waded into the issue.

As to the other purchaser of the P-8A's, I would note that Britain is one of the four other countries besides the USA that meets its NATO funding commitments, actually commits substantial numbers of troops, and is active countering Russian expansionism with the USA. In fact, I imagine if Brexit negotiations falter, to the abject horror and humiliation of much of the EU, the British will not hesitate to use this leverage (along with their intelligence capabilities) to attain a better deal.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

13. I know for a fact that Norway...

... has not been delinquent in addressing the increasing threat from the USSR, err... I mean Putin's Russia prior to the pretender in chief's ascension. Addressing the Greenland-Iceland-UK corridor with the purchase of these planes shows they are earnest.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/07/13/norway-joins-countries-considering-buying-us-p8-spy-plane.html

[branford]

17. They are becoming "earnest" because they realize they are on the front lines

and fear the USA's backing might not be as unconditional as it was in past decades.

Do you have any links actually indicating that Norway (or the other delinquent countries) now intends to spend the requisite 2% of GDP on defense and more actively contribute actual troops to NATO peacekeeping and defense efforts?

At least to me, the plane purchases appear more public relations band-aid and desperate to curry favor with the incoming Trump administration. Norway and most other NATO members need to do a whole lot more, and they need to do it yesterday.

Lastly, many of our NATO and European partners have historically complained or ridiculed America's defense efforts and spending and our role as a "world policeman" and purported guarantor of security. I imagine that in many European capitals, particularly with the incoming Trump administration, they are now quite terrified that the USA might just be taking their past advice.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

21. I still know for a fact that Norway has been doing more...

... than you are willing to give them credit for. Good luck on your mission!

[branford]

22. NATO requires that member countries spend 2% of GDP on defense.

Norway (and virtually all other members) do not even come close.

When they are under threat, why should I praise Norway for buying a few planes when they still have not firmly committed to meaning their actual NATO treaty obligations? You laud Norway for doing "more," while I want an explanation why they haven't met their obligations before and still are not meeting their treaty commitments. Why are your standards so low? If Russia is such a threat (and I believe it is), I damn well expect our European and NATO partners to act like it, even if it means popular social spending is diverted to defense. Most Democrats, myself included, don't like America's role as world policeman or want us engaged in yet more wars. They best way to reduce that role is for other western countries to start meeting their own binding NATO treaty obligations.

This is an area where both Obama and Trump actually agree. There is no excuse not to meet NATO obligations, particularly during a period of Russian aggression and for countries like Norway who are quite rich and claim to be under direct threat.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/obama-nato-pay-fair-share-231405
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/25/obama-tells-complacent-europe-to-hike-military-spending/

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

23. Perhaps because they have a sane government...

... that is too busy spending oil money on projects the citizens really want, single payer healthcare, expansion of parks, infrastructure, etc...

[branford]

24. Yet, they seem to be quite afraid of the Russians.

If they don't want to meet their NATO treaty commitments and devote sufficient resources for their own defense, despite their ample wealth, why should Americans sacrifice their blood and treasure to help them?

If Norwegians will not prioritize their own defense with social spending and other goodies, it takes a special kind of chutzpah to ask that the USA, Britain and others sacrifice for them. NATO is a mutual commitment, and even President Obama acknowledges that there have been too many egregious NATO free riders for far too long. While Trump lacks social and diplomatic niceties, at least his bluntness has many of our European partners now realizing that they must bear some proportionate responsibility for their own defense.

If the Norwegian's fear about the Russians become even a partial reality, they will sorely regret not meeting NATO obligations. The costs now will truly pale in comparison to those after Russia further asserts itself, and will most assuredly have a greater impact on cherished social spending.

I hope you enjoy those shiny new parks when the Russians come knocking and all the USA wants to provide is "logistical and diplomatic support."

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

25. Why do you imply that the Norwegians...

... have done nothing towards their own defense?

[branford]

26. I never said that Norwegians have done "nothing" towards their own defense.

I was discussing mutually agreed upon NATO treaty obligations.

Norway's current defensive resources would be pitiful against true Russian aggression and expansionism. Norway is relying upon NATO (i.e., the USA) as a deterrent against and protection from Russia. However, Norway (and most other NATO members) continually fail and refuse to meet their NATO spending and manpower obligations.

My point is and always has been that it evinces a great deal of chutzpah from advanced, rich countries like Norway to expect NATO and American protection while conspicuously not fulfilling their NATO spending and troop obligations. If Norwegians will not sufficiently sacrifice and devote resources towards their own defense, including fulfilling legal treaty obligations, why should anyone else sacrifice for them, regardless of whether it's the USA, Britain or other NATO members. The fact that Norway bought a few planes because they're suddenly (and correctly) very nervous about Russia does not change the fact that they historically have not, nor currently express an intention to, meet their 2% of GDP defense spending requirement.

I'm a Democrat. Of course I like social spending on matters like health care, infrastructure, parks, etc., but defense is not a luxury or discretionary item, no less when you're neighbors with Putin. However, many of America's European allies have not only taken our defense commitments and sacrifice of blood and treasure for granted, but openly mocked us for such spending. With President Obama and now Trump's comments, these same European government are now suddenly terrified, and I'm not particularly sympathetic.

With all due respect, stop patting yourself on the proverbial back because you bought a few military planes out of desperation (and call well afford), and start demonstrating that you actually care about your own defense as much as you expect other countries to. The best way to do this is to immediately commit to and actually spend 2% of your GDP on defense as you are already required to do by your membership in NATO, even if it means you'll have a few less parks. The Russians see and smell weakness, but the choice is yours.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

27. Here is what I was getting at...

... I probably shouldn't mention it, as it is a very touchy operation as far as Putin and Norway go. There is more, but I would feel guilty for fanning the flames:

https://www.google.com/search?q=NATO+Norway+caves&oq=NATO+Norway+caves&aqs=chrome..69i57.9215j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[branford]

29. Stories like this are even more reason why Norway and other NATO members

need to commit more resources and personnel to defense. Not only because it is technically required by NATO membership, but as a demonstration that these countries take the threat of Russian aggression seriously and are willing to shoulder their responsibilities for their own defense.

Again, do you believe it unreasonable that the voting citizens of the USA (and Britain, Poland, Greece, etc.) might resent sacrificing their troops and needed financial resources to countries that ignore NATO treaty obligations, particularly countries like Norway who are both very wealthy, and unlike America, claim to be under direct threat?

I'm sincerely glad Norway is beginning to take a more active defense posture and purchasing some badly needed military equipment. However, it's only a small start and still falls below their NATO 2% GDP obligations. It is simply unreasonable to expect me and others to heap praise on Norway for beginning to act in their own defense interests.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

30. The NATO obligations by European countries have always been unmet...

... I do not know of any year that all of them, let alone one of them, have met their agreed obligations. And don't forget, Russia has a, "warm water port", in a small section carved out of former East Germany on the Baltic. And ethnic Germans are moving back into it, after it had been, "Sovietized", with ethnic Russians. All the more reason why I have been keeping an eye on what is happening in the region over the past year or so. NATO has, "storm troopers", in the area, too. Places that Putin hates them to be. Good discussion.

[branford]

31. Britain has traditionally met NATO spending requirements,

but they are a rare exception among countries with significant military capabilities (and behind the scenes, the EU realizes the huge negative effect Brexit will have on its security and deterrent capabilities).

I also don't mean to pick on Norway about not meeting NATO obligations as virtually no member does, but the OP was about Norway.

However, many European government have grown quite complacent and taken American resources and protection for granted (and even criticized American military spending). I believe one of the reasons why Putin has grown increasingly bold is because he sees how little most of Europe devotes to defense along with how many liberal western countries just don't have the stomach for conflict. As America pivots towards Asia and/or looks inward, European countries will need to provide much of their own defense or demonstrate to American voters why we should risk American lives for what are often perceived to be rich, spoiled, cowardly and annoyingly self-righteous continental Europeans. Socialized healthcare, fast trains and nice parks will not deter Russian tanks.

I believe Russia needs to understand that its aggression will not be tolerated. However, this will not happen without a much greater commitment by Europe, the countries on the front line.

[wordpix]

28. well at least Boeing is getting rich in our latest worldwide militarization/arms race

when is Boeing moving operations to Mexico or China?

[Sunlei]

10. when trump puts American boots on the ground to assist his friend russia/assad in genocide,

will ally Norway send boots too?

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

15. You can still use the internet to answer that...

... question.

[keithbvadu2]

12. Be careful what you wish for, Norway.

Putin is already calling in his markers from Trump.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141630606

"It turns out that United Russia won the elections in America," Viktor Nazarov, the governor of Omsk, Russia, declared in a radio interview.

[TygrBright]

19. HAHAHAHAHAH!! Those squareheads... such kidders!! n/t