The good news: We're not all folding. Prime minister Bondevik was on TV2 Holmgang on Wednesday. He said that Norway is now more likely to stay in Iraq beyond June than we were before Madrid. June is when Spain pulls out, (unless the US hands over control to the UN), and Bondevik is concerned that for us to leave at the same time would send the wrong message to al-Qaeda. He's right to be concerned, and it's to his credit that he sees this.

The bad news: If M11 taught Bondevik this much, it taught him little else, and others nothing at all. Among other opinions expressed on the same program, by some of Norway's leading politicians, pundits and activists:

• The war in Iraq has killed thousands of Iraqi civilians, and it has increased hatred against the West. The fact that the whole war was illegal and based on fabricated evidence has only served to confirm the views of those who hate us. (Petter Nome, the Norwegian Refugee Council, who appears to see al-Qaeda as the armed wing of the Security Council, punishing those who disobey it, and eager to come war zone civilians everywhere to the rescue.)
• The US has an exaggerated faith in military measures, as proven by the current crisis in Iraq. We need an alternative: A focus on "alternative solutions" that contribute to building "well-functioning democracies". To fight terrorism we must reduce frustration caused by poverty and oppression, and the feeling many countries have of being overrun or ignored by the world community. (Åslaug Haga, Centre Party, who apparently doesn't see toppling Saddam to build a well-functioning democracy in Iraq as an alternative solution.)
• There's a difference between conquering Afghanistan and eradicating al-Qaeda. The war on terror has spawned tens of new radical Islamist terrorist groups, and the Bush administration's unwillingness to form coalitions has been disastrous. We need something with more nuance than military measures. And besides, Islamic terrorism has always existed, and always will. (Harald Stanghelle, Aftenposten, who has a teenagers definition of "always", and has forgotten who it was who created the coalition against Iraq, and who it was who opposed it.)
• The root of the terrorist evil is occupation and oppression, which causes hatred and fanaticism. (Bondevik, who should ask himself why of all the oppressed and occupied peoples in the world, only those exposed to the religious totalitarianism of radical Islam become terrorists, - including many who aren't even oppressed.)

Many guests repeated the dogma that fear of terrorism can be abused to remove our civil rights. While correct, this fear of doing too much is itself often abused by those who want to do too little. So I was pleased to hear Minister of Justice Odd Einar Dørum warn against the fear of fear, pointing out that to prevent terrorist attacks is nearly impossible without surveillance and intelligence gathering. This is often overlooked. Yes, there's a risk of government abuse of surveillance powers, but this must be weighed against the risks of denying government the power to fight terrorism.

Those who warn the loudest against new anti-terror measures tend to use the status quo as the baseline which all measures must be weighed against. Now we are free, and if we give the police this new power then we are less free, which is very bad, because we must never sacrifice freedom for security. But we have already given our governments powers that can be and are abused, because we correctly or mistakenly believe the benefits are worth the risks. We have already given up some of our freedom to be safe. Perhaps we shouldn't give up any more, but it's meaningless to simply point out that a new law reduces freedom or carries the risk of abuse, as if that itself is so evil that we can't ever accept it. We already have, and for a good reason - crime would be impossible to fight without it. So Dørum is right: What we have to fear is fear of fear as well as fear itself.

But the only guest expressing something quite close to my own views was Jan Arild Elliingsen from the Progress Party (FrP). FrP has recently proposed that it should be easier for the police hold Islamist groups in Norway under surveillance, a proposal criticized by the other guests. It is a good idea, however, and is at the very least worth considering. FrP has its weaknesses, but it's the only party that takes fighting terrorism seriously, whether at home or abroad. It has again become apparent that foreign policies matter - not just for other people, far away, but for us, here and now. What our government does abroad influences our own well-being today and in the future. In that climate, I would feel more comfortable with FrP in government - and quite concerned with Labor, the Socialist Left or the Centre Party. We too have our Aznar's, but also a few Zapatero's.

It sounds like in Norway there IS some discussion of real issues and solutions. That's definitely encouraging. Let's all keep talking and slowly slowly the new ideas will begin to seep into the public consciousness.

"[F]ear of doing too much is itself often abused by those who want to do too little."

I absolutely agree. I've become used to hearing of how the Patriot Act is a "fascist" abomination--most amusingly from America-hating Europeans feigning concern for our “trampled” civil liberties :) .

But I’ve read the Act, and while there are several sections that could conceivably be abused, it contains a private right of action against the government for any such abuse. My view is that this is the best way to keep the government honest: The prospect of large money damages is a powerful incentive for any party able to make a colorable claim of abuse to do so. It is telling that—in perhaps the most litigious society on earth—the number of Patriot Act suits filed against the U.S. government in the past 2 ½ years is exactly zero.

European governments passing anti-terrorism legislation should consider including such a provision. Not only does it punish any abuse, it places government actions taken pursuant to its new powers under intense public scrutiny. Powers that are abused can be easily taken away.

xxx: interesting to hear that. I, myself, haven't bothered to read the Patriot Act in detail because of two reasons:

1. Our society is filled with litiginous left-wing lawyers who are just salivating at the chance to hoist the government's ass into court over some fundamental constitutional issue. If my right-wing ass ever got into trouble, it would be these left-wing lawyers that I would call first.

2. In a society where credit card companies have more information on me than my own government, it simply doesn't matter whether the government is spying on me or not. Should the government really want to know about my sorry little life, let them subpoena the records. I'm sure they'll have a chuckle.

It is indeed good news that Norway's not folding. However, if the SL, Centre Party and Labor Parties make Iraq an election issue, Norway will still be a prime target for al-Qaeda's domino strategy.

Maybe people in Coalition countries need to lobby their opposition parties to support the war in Iraq, or at least keep quiet on the issue!

I've completely overhauled my page on the Coalition of the Willing in the wake of the Spanish election. It never ceases to amaze me how many European countries are in the Coalition, and on the other hand how widely it is believed that European Governments are overwhelmingly against the Coalition, with the exception of a few renegades (Britain and Spain).
http://geocities.com/pwhce/willing.html

Bjorn, your post once again confirmed my impression that the European intelligentsia is a pack of idiots, unshakeable in their dogmatic beliefs no matter what the evidence to the contrary.

My friend told me this after the M-11 attack in Madrid: "If something like that happens in Norway, I'll blame [PM] Bondevik".

I am afraid that comment is typical. A lot of people just don't understand why we are putting ourselves at risk supporting the US in Iraq. Norway has so far been a oasis of safety in a dangerous world so why should we bring the terrorists' focus upon ourselves? It's like we're living in a world of our own, isolated from everyone else.

Quote:
"... (Bondevik, who should ask himself why of all the oppressed and occupied peoples in the world, only those exposed to the religious totalitarianism of radical Islam become terrorists, - including many who aren't even oppressed.)"

Sorry, I can't agree with that one... Where does the IRA og ETA fit into this analysis of yours?

jonas: You're right. I didn't think through those words.

To rephrase myself, there are many oppressed and occupied peoples of the world, but only those exposed to totalitarian death cults such as radical Islam become terrorists. I believe that includes most of them. The point is t hat oppression and occupation doesn't cause terrorism - ideology does - and while oppression and occupation helps people turn to those ideologies many turn to them for other reasons.

Well, this will give you pause, via Roger Simon's blog:

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12649

...In a sum, this was a sort of a psychological coup d'etat conducted from the outside with support on the inside. It was most probably carried out by al Qaeda on the ground, but most likely provoked by a greater consensus of powers. To stop the greater Middle East initiative undertaken by the US and its Allies, you need to dismantle its tools. In order to do so, you must destroy the Coalition-of-the-Willing. You would concentrate on its weakest component, in this case, Spain. All you would need to do is to bring down its government -- staging an electoral coup initiated by a terror act a few days before the elections is certainly possible, as we have just witnessed....

Strange the way the media in Denmark and Norway simply ignore all the good news fra Iraq..

Pew-analysis - twice as many pakistans think favourable of USA now than before (muslim countries have in general not become more offensive to USA - than before... Europeans have.. because they fear muslim anger:-)

http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/206.pdf

(page 6)

Oxford Reseach International (paid by BBC, ABC etc) concludes that 70 percent of the iraqis think they life have bettered since the war... Only 20 procent wants a islamic state!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/15_03_04_iraqsurvey.pdf

More links on my danish website:

http://www.uriasposten.dk/2004_03_01_arkiv.html#108003202563478146

Trackback URL: /cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/633