LONDON / OSLO (VG) – We do not threaten anyone. This is Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre’s response to Moscow’s claim that Finnish NATO membership threatens Russia. He also strongly disagrees with SV’s warning against Swedish membership.
Just updated
–
Støre had a 45-minute meeting with his British prime minister colleague Boris Johnson on Friday, where Europe’s security quickly came up as a topic.
After the meeting, Jonas Gahr Støre (Labor Party) came with a strong reaction to the SV’s foreign policy spokesperson Ingrid Fiskaa writes in Aftonbladet on Friday, that she warns Sweden against applying for NATO membership.
– We live in countries where everyone is free to think what they want. But I fundamentally disagree, says Støre to VG.
To VG, SV’s foreign policy spokesperson, Ingrid Fiskaa, says that she has tried to nuance the debate.
She also says that SV will in any case vote for Swedish NATO membership in the Storting if the application comes (see the rest of the answer below).
Vulnerable
Fiskaa argues in Aftonbladet with “NATO has made Norway more vulnerable as a country”, and that Sweden will lose room for maneuver for its own security policy interests through membership.
– Norway has since 1949 had security through NATO membership in changing times. This has led to close allies such as the United Kingdom taking co-responsibility for our security, and we are taking co-responsibility for theirs, Støre answers.
– It is our experience, which I think Sweden and Finland have studied carefully. So her analysis, which I then assume is SV’s analysis, I fundamentally disagree with, says Støre.
1 / 4
–
–
–
––
–
Cold shoulder from Vedum
Minister of Finance Trygve Slagsvold Vedum (Sp) says that the last three months have shown how important the collective defense from NATO is for Norway.
But he will not give advice to the Swedes:
– I think it is strange that someone in the Storting’s presidency has a say in the Swedish NATO debate. Sweden must decide this for itself. NATO has served us well all the way and serves us well today. It shows the last three months with clarity, he says.
– We will not give advice to the Swedes, but we are positive if they choose the same security policy alliance as we have done, Vedum says to VG.
–– Lying
FRP leader Sylvi Listhaug goes hard with Fiskaa:
– I think it’s just over that you spread that kind of false fairy tale in Sweden. We know that SV is against NATO membership in Norway, but serving lies that we have made ourselves more vulnerable by being a NATO member is completely pathetic. NATO has been the most important security guarantee in Norway, says Listhaug to VG.
– You say they serve lies. How do you justify it?
– SV says that it has made Norway more vulnerable. On the contrary, it is NATO membership that has meant that Norway has had the security guarantee we have had since 1949, she says.
–Will respect Swedish decision
SV’s foreign policy spokesperson Ingrid Fiskaa does not want to respond to Listhaug’s accusation that she is serving lies to the Swedish people.
She says that she has tried to nuance the Swedish debate.
– My post in the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet is about the Norwegian experience with NATO, and it is that membership places strong guidelines on our defense and foreign policy. This has meant that Norway has a less independent voice internationally, and that our defense has been reduced and adapted to warfare abroad, Fiskaa writes in an e-mail to VG.
– This policy is contrary to Norwegian interests, and has made Norway more dependent and vulnerable. The Norwegian experiences can hopefully be useful in the Swedish debate, and are meant to be a contribution to nuance this, she writes.
–Fiskaa says that SV’s Swedish sister party Vänsterpartiet is against membership in NATO and that their analysis against Swedish membership is the same as hers.
SV will respect the Swedish decision regardless, and will vote for Swedish membership when this eventually comes to the Storting.
VG has asked whether Fiskaa has anchored her point of view and whether this is SV’s view.
– There are divided opinions about NATO in SV. But what many will agree on, and I think it goes far beyond SV, is that there is little foreign and defense policy debate in Norway. Many important decisions have been taken as a result of internal NATO processes without any particular public discussion. The world is constantly changing, so regardless of what one thinks about NATO, there is a need for a more up-to-date debate in Norway, she writes.
–
