MANAGER
SV opens to turn in the NATO issue, but it seems artificial to stop there. Putin’s war makes it equally necessary to take up the debate on relations with Europe.
–
Manager: This is an editorial from Dagbladet, and expresses the newspaper’s views. Dagbladet’s political editor is responsible for the editorial.
Published
–
–
With a overwhelming majority, Oslo SV this weekend went in to ask the parent party to reconsider the NATO issue.
The decision is relatively cautious in form – it asks the party to take the “debate”. When the thirst is so great to tackle the NATO issue again, there is still little doubt that the party is now well on its way to supporting Norwegian membership in the North Atlantic Defense Alliance.
Decisions in Oslo SV are also not unique, but confirm a trend that has become visible in the last week. More and more SV members, ranging from profiles to county leaders across the country, consider the time ripe to challenge the party’s most important security policy position.
In the big picture is this change in a medium-sized party in Norway perhaps unimportant. At the same time, it emphasizes the turning point we are now living in. SV’s new orientation reflects the war in Ukraine, and the violent political changes it has led to in a short time. SV, a party created on the basis of a political movement that had no to NATO as one of its most important foundations, finds itself forced to think completely new.
–
The innovation comes on overtime. 90 percent of the party’s voters are already positive about NATO membership, and the number has been stable for a long time. Together with the strong support for NATO among the parties in the Storting, SV’s no has in practice been irrelevant. Now, in addition, SV’s alternative – a Nordic defense alliance – is dead. Sweden and Finland are increasingly moving towards NATO for protection, perhaps ending up with full membership.
In reality, it revolves this is also about something more: Europe’s new role, and a new view of the importance of European cooperation. Some SV strategists point out that discussing NATO’s position is a good alternative now, so that one can still keep the EU and EEA ghost at bay. It may be tactically smart, but politically inadequate. A yes to NATO (dominated by the US) and a no to European cooperation is also a reasoning with a built-in logical failure for a party like SV – known for being particularly critical of the US “great power game”.
Putin’s invasion is the final, brutal consequence of a years-long sabotage against Ukraine’s western turn. The people of Ukraine have in reality been at war since 2014, in a struggle to forge stronger ties with the EU and NATO. It’s not just about economics, it’s just as much about democracy, the rule of law and freedom. Putin’s invasion, and the EU’s rapid and massive response, have clearly shown the following: Close European cooperation is first and foremost a crucial precondition for autonomy, not a threat to it.
The NATO discussion is a welcome sign of innovation in SV’s foreign policy. It will still be strange if the radical left stops there. It is artificial to limit the debate on the political watershed in our time to a question of defense cooperation.
–