07-01-2011, 06:12 PM
Between 2005 and 2007 continued intense efforts from the Israeli side in order to halt the Iranian nuclear program. The Israeli strategy was to get the UN to take the hardest possible sanctions against the Iranian regime. To get the International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA to more actively to denounce the Iranian nuclear program, was also imperative.
In two documents that are authored in the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv, which Aftenposten obtained through Wikileaks, referred to Norway not in a flattering way in this context. The Israelis felt that Norway did not play as a team and was a brake in the effort to impose sanctions against the mullah regime in Iran. Both Americans and Israelis were also highly critical of the IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the fall of 2005 had been in Oslo to receive Nobel Peace Prize.
The criticism against Norway falls into a pattern: Previous documents from the American Embassy in Oslo, which is published by Aftenposten, shows that the then U.S. Ambassador Benson K. Whitney was salty in the criticism of what he said in a note refers to as Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre solo towards Iran. The fact that Norway had a so-called security policy dialogue with Iran, the embassy found very problematic.
Cons
In one of two documents from the U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv, where Norway is discussed, referred from a meeting between Director-General Gideon Frank at the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv, Richard H. Jones, which took place on 7 February 2006:
- Frank and Levit (Frank's second in command) complained that Norway does not play a positive role in the IAEA, but not elaborated the matter further, it says.
One and a half years later, in October 2007, met State Secretary of the U.S. State Department, Patricia McNerney, a number of top officials and women from the Israeli Foreign Ministry and intelligence service.
During the conversation discussing the option to gather support for international sanctions against Iran. The Israelis point out that the U.S. has strong support from France in this case. The Germans will follow the French, believe Israeli Foreign Ministry.
A representative of the Israeli foreign intelligence service Mossad inject that Europeans are generally little interest in sanctions, particularly in the Italy and Austria.
- The representative of the Israeli Foreign Ministry noted that Norway - which was not a member of the EU - was also problematic when it came to penalties, it says.
Sarcastic
Mohamed ElBaradei. PHOTO: AFP
While the Israelis quite soberly observes Norwegian reluctance to intervene too tightly against the mullah regime in Tehran, is the tone bordering on the sarcastic about Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, which had the task of monitoring the Iranian nuclear program.
When Americans and Israelis met on 7 February 2006, it was gone just two months ago, ElBaradei had been to Oslo and took his share of the Nobel Peace Prize for 2005. The commander of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission makes it clear that he did not see on ElBaradei as some powerful player in the fight against the Iranian nuclear weapons:
- Israel looks at the IAEA's chief executive ElBaradei as a negative character who tries to go around Iran creates the problems, instead of going straight at them, they say.
The criticism of ElBaradei has not been any less during the meeting between Patricia McNerney and the Israeli state service woman Miriam Ziv:
- ElBaradei sees itself as a peacemaker who surrounds himself with a group of people that do not contradict him. The U.S. should warn him that his behavior threatens his reputation. In particular, it will go beyond repute ElBaradei on Iran actually acquiring nuclear weapons while he was still head of the IAEA, called it from Israeli sources. An official from the Israeli intelligence adds that ElBaradei sees itself as nothing less than a Dalai Lama-like type.
If many EU countries and Norway are printed on his passport by the Israelis, it is small items compared with the discussion that is part of China. A senior figure in Israeli intelligence says that one is unable to communicate with the Chinese because they "see the world differently." The Chinese have only one concern vis-Ã -vis Iran, namely that it may influence the relationship with the United States. Beyond the Chinese have no objections to having links with the mullah regime, suggested it.
------------------------------------------------
2/13/2009 14:48
"C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 000115 SIPDIS EUR/NB, DRL, EUR/OHI, NEA/IPA E.O. 12958:
DECL: 02/04/2019
TAGS: PREL, KPAL, PGOV, PINR, IS, NO
SUBJECT: PART I: CONSTRAINTS ON NORWAY´S MIDDLE EAST ROLE? REF: A. OSLO 90 B. 06 OSLO 1047
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Kevin M. Johnson for reasons 1.4 b and d
Dokumentene
Internettstedet Wikileaks har fått tak i mer enn 250 000 dokumenter fra amerikanske ambassader og konsulater verden over.
Aftenposten har fått tilgang til alle dokumentene uten noen form for klausuler.
Dokumentene blir fortløpende vurdert som grunnlag for artikler etter de samme redaksjonelle kriterier og etiske regler som ellers i Aftenpostens journalistikk.
E-post til redaksjonen:
wikileaks@aftenposten.no
1. © Summary: Norway aspires to be a leader in Middle East peace negotiations and could be a genuine asset in bringing peace to the region. Norway´s diplomatic principles, focus on dialogue, and mediation history have helped raise Norway´s profile as a peacemaker. Its tense relationship with Israel and anti-Semitism in Norway, as well as its approach to Hamas and Hamas positions, could constrain the effectiveness of Norway´s desired high-profile mediator role. Part II of this cable series explores the growth of anti-Semitism in Norway and Part III analyses Norway´s Foreign Minister´s critical role in elevating Norway on the world stage. End Summary. Norwegian Diplomacy:
Strengths and Desire for a Big Role
----------------------
2. © Shaped by FM Stoere, Norwegian foreign policy prioritizes peace promotion. Stoere is a skilled foreign minister, drawing on national traditions of international engagement, and adding his own focus on humanitarian aid and peace promotion to create an appealing portrayal of Norway as a world leader in peacemaking. Stoere dearly desires a central role in shaping Middle East peace and believes he has the ability to deliver. Norway brings clear strengths to the table. Stoere has been careful to maintain constant ties with Hamas (although no longer on the political level), steady and significant support for the Palestinian Authority and continued regular ties to Israel. Norway has a global reputation for expertise in peace negotiations in Guatemala, Tibet, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka among others, although their efforts have floundered lately. Norway also willing to spend substantial money in the promotion of peace. Norway´s non-EU membership can also at times be helpful. (Practically, Norway follows the vast majority of EU positions but has diverged, most notably in holding talks with the Tamil Tigers and Hamas, EU designated terrorist groups.)
Mediation Expertise
-------------------
3. © Norwegian society values dialogue above all. Talk, even without any expectation of results, is seen as valuable. Anyone who draws a line and refuses to talk to an opposing party is seen as a radical unilateralist. Conversely, Norwegians are extremely opposed to the use of military force to achieve goals, no matter how laudable.
4. © Compounding this aversion to force, Norwegians do not generally see any threats. For example, they do not see a danger from terrorism. (This attitude prevails in the MFA and other elites, despite FM Stoere´s hotel being attacked by suicide bombers in Kabul.) This societal attitude was demonstrated by Norway´s first terrorist case. Despite shooting at Oslo´s synagogue, planning to behead the Israeli ambassador and to attack the Israeli and U.S. embassies, the accused was convicted only of grave vandalism (although his strict sentence showed some understanding of the severity of the charges).
5. © Finally, Norway has substantial funds to back any mediating role it chooses to play. Rich with energy funds, it has for years been a leading donor to the Palestinian authority, most recently chairing the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee. Historically, it has been willing to commit to the long-term, funding projects to promote peace in Sri Lanka for example for over 27 years.
6. © Norway´s desire to make a difference combined with the willingness to expend time and money has made it a mediator in conflicts as far a field as Sri Lanka, Colombia, Haiti, and Sudan. It has elevated peace and reconciliation studies in its universities and reorganized its Foreign Ministry to showcase its expertise in this area. It revels in its self-described role as the ""moral superpower"" and points to the Oslo Peace Accords as a defining national moment.
Norway´s History with its Jewish Community and Israel
-----------------------------------------------------
7. © In the Middle East, however, its history may constrain the role it can play. Norway´s Jewish community has always been very small and based in the country´s biggest cities, Oslo and Trondheim. Challenges confronted the community early on. The birth of modern Norway was its 1814 constitution, which included a clause excluding Jews (later removed in 1851). In German-occupied Norway, Norwegian police cooperated with the Germans, rounding up almost all of the Norwegian Jewish population, most of which were sent to concentration camps.
8. © Post-war Norway cultivated close ties with Israel and much political support existed for Israel. The Norwegian Labor Party (long the dominant party in Norway) has historically had close ties to Israel´s labor party and Golda Meir visited Oslo and reportedly had a friendly personal relationship with Norwegian PM Gerhardsen. This resulted in Norway secretly providing heavy water to the fledgling Israeli nuclear program.
9. © The 1990s Oslo Process thrust Norway into Middle East politics for the first time and seemed to herald peace in the Middle East as well as a new peacemaker role for Norway. As the Oslo Accords crumbled, ties between Norway and Israel weakened. The Lebanon wars had a major impact, with approximately 20,000 Norwegians serving in UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon from 1978 to 1998. These soldiers came home with sympathetic reports about Palestinian refugees and negative impressions of Israelis. Israeli settlements and walls in the West Bank, and invasions of Lebanon and Gaza contributed to Norwegians´ increasingly negative view of Israel.
10. © This shift was so dramatic that a 2006 cartoon in a major newspaper depicted the PM of Israel as a concentration camp guard. During the 2006 war in Lebanon prominent author Jostein Gaarder made a statement saying ""I refuse to recognize the state of Israel"" and characterized Judaism as ""an archaic national and warlike religion."" (See septel and ref B for a detailed discussion of anti-Semitism in Norway.) By 2007, FM Stoere decided to recognize the Palestinian Unity Government, which included Hamas Ministers. Hamas´ vow to destroy Israel was ignored or characterized as only rhetoric by the Norwegians. Norway became the leading dissenter to international norms (only joined by Switzerland), willing to overlook Hamas´ stated aims in pursuit of dialogue at all costs. At this point, some Israeli officials began to characterize Norway as the most anti-Israel state in Europe.
(Note: Although the GON would deny it, there are clear signs that contacts with Hamas go beyond a tactical desire for dialogue to a level of sympathy for Hamas positions. The FM once told DCM for example that one could not expect Hamas to recognize Israel without knowing which borders Israel will have. While the FM expresses some sympathy for Hamas´ positions only in unguarded moments, other prominent Norwegians go further. End Note.)
11. © Norway´s growing minority population also plays a role in hardening public attitude toward Israel. The primary minority groups in Norway (25% of Oslo´s population) are Muslim and stem from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan. They are interested in Middle East politics and not surprisingly very critical of Israel. (See reftel A.) ""Traditional"" Norwegians are independently quite critical of Israel as discussed above, but it is likely that this viewpoint will be re-enforced by the growing minority groups in Norway.
Gaza´s Impact
-------------
12. © The recent Gaza war further hardened anti-Israel attitudes in Norway´s public and elite opinion, with the notable exceptions of the Progress Party (about 25% of the vote) and the small Christian Democratic Party. However the size of recent pro-Israel (500) and anti-Israel demonstrations (over 10,000) illustrate the prevailing sentiments. (See reftel A.)
13. © Since the Gaza war, the question of whether anti-Semitism is on the increase became the subject of an intense public debate. Much of the debate centers on defining when comments by public figures are or are not anti-Semitic. Press coverage and public opinion of the Gaza war was overwhelmingly, and at times vehemently, anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian (viewing Israeli tactics as brutal and Palestinians as innocent victims). Therefore the question of anti-Semitism has often been phrased in terms of when criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism. (See septel for a detailed discussion of the strong comments that have been made by leading Norwegian politicians questioning the ability of Jewish members of the Obama government to give unbiased advice and outlining the sense of threat felt by the Norwegian Jewish community.)
14. © On the official level, Hamas´ rocket attacks against Israel received criticisms, but the clear focus of Norwegian diplomacy encouraged Israel to be restrained and to maintain dialogue. While FM Stoere has been careful to criticize both parties, Norway clearly places most of the blame for the conflict on Israel´s policies.
Israel´s Reaction
-----------------
15. © The Israel Government has chosen, according to an Embassy official, to take a very low key approach to Norway´s negative views towards Israel. They see no point in openly pressing the government. With GON Ministers and Vice Ministers having a track record of meeting with Hamas, calling for boycotts of Israel, and showing up at violent anti-Israeli riots, the Israel Embassy holds out very little hope that the current GON can ever act moderately towards Israel. That said, they appreciate that the GON MFA is disciplining one of its own for anti-Semitic emails and that an initial meeting between FM Stoere and the Israeli Ambassador was very positive. They hope that small steps suchQs an R&D agreement may bring some slight warming of relations.
16. © However, the Israeli Embassy official noted that while his view of the GON may be negative, the view of Norway in the GOI is even less positive, and the view of the Israeli public which sees only negative items about Norway in the media is even less. Therefore, while Israel can tolerate Norway being the Chair of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Palestine (ADHL), the idea of any greater role for Norway in Middle East talks is unpalatable.
Comment
-------
17. © Norway, and particularly their charismatic Foreign Minister, has a strong interest in playing a peacemaker role. With money to spend and open channels to all parties in the conflict, they bring important assets to this role. However, Norway´s attitudes towards Israel and Hamas also constrain Norwegian diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. Norwegian public and elite opposition to most of Israel´s actions and their view that Israel does not value dialogue is widely reported. A level of Norwegian sympathy for some Hamas´ positions, hidden behind its broad policy of dialogue with all, should be kept in mind as we engage with Norway on U.S. Middle East priorities. End comment.
WHITNEY
In two documents that are authored in the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv, which Aftenposten obtained through Wikileaks, referred to Norway not in a flattering way in this context. The Israelis felt that Norway did not play as a team and was a brake in the effort to impose sanctions against the mullah regime in Iran. Both Americans and Israelis were also highly critical of the IAEA Chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the fall of 2005 had been in Oslo to receive Nobel Peace Prize.
The criticism against Norway falls into a pattern: Previous documents from the American Embassy in Oslo, which is published by Aftenposten, shows that the then U.S. Ambassador Benson K. Whitney was salty in the criticism of what he said in a note refers to as Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre solo towards Iran. The fact that Norway had a so-called security policy dialogue with Iran, the embassy found very problematic.
Cons
In one of two documents from the U.S. Embassy Tel Aviv, where Norway is discussed, referred from a meeting between Director-General Gideon Frank at the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and the U.S. Ambassador in Tel Aviv, Richard H. Jones, which took place on 7 February 2006:
- Frank and Levit (Frank's second in command) complained that Norway does not play a positive role in the IAEA, but not elaborated the matter further, it says.
One and a half years later, in October 2007, met State Secretary of the U.S. State Department, Patricia McNerney, a number of top officials and women from the Israeli Foreign Ministry and intelligence service.
During the conversation discussing the option to gather support for international sanctions against Iran. The Israelis point out that the U.S. has strong support from France in this case. The Germans will follow the French, believe Israeli Foreign Ministry.
A representative of the Israeli foreign intelligence service Mossad inject that Europeans are generally little interest in sanctions, particularly in the Italy and Austria.
- The representative of the Israeli Foreign Ministry noted that Norway - which was not a member of the EU - was also problematic when it came to penalties, it says.
Sarcastic
Mohamed ElBaradei. PHOTO: AFP
While the Israelis quite soberly observes Norwegian reluctance to intervene too tightly against the mullah regime in Tehran, is the tone bordering on the sarcastic about Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA, which had the task of monitoring the Iranian nuclear program.
When Americans and Israelis met on 7 February 2006, it was gone just two months ago, ElBaradei had been to Oslo and took his share of the Nobel Peace Prize for 2005. The commander of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission makes it clear that he did not see on ElBaradei as some powerful player in the fight against the Iranian nuclear weapons:
- Israel looks at the IAEA's chief executive ElBaradei as a negative character who tries to go around Iran creates the problems, instead of going straight at them, they say.
The criticism of ElBaradei has not been any less during the meeting between Patricia McNerney and the Israeli state service woman Miriam Ziv:
- ElBaradei sees itself as a peacemaker who surrounds himself with a group of people that do not contradict him. The U.S. should warn him that his behavior threatens his reputation. In particular, it will go beyond repute ElBaradei on Iran actually acquiring nuclear weapons while he was still head of the IAEA, called it from Israeli sources. An official from the Israeli intelligence adds that ElBaradei sees itself as nothing less than a Dalai Lama-like type.
If many EU countries and Norway are printed on his passport by the Israelis, it is small items compared with the discussion that is part of China. A senior figure in Israeli intelligence says that one is unable to communicate with the Chinese because they "see the world differently." The Chinese have only one concern vis-Ã -vis Iran, namely that it may influence the relationship with the United States. Beyond the Chinese have no objections to having links with the mullah regime, suggested it.
------------------------------------------------
2/13/2009 14:48
"C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 000115 SIPDIS EUR/NB, DRL, EUR/OHI, NEA/IPA E.O. 12958:
DECL: 02/04/2019
TAGS: PREL, KPAL, PGOV, PINR, IS, NO
SUBJECT: PART I: CONSTRAINTS ON NORWAY´S MIDDLE EAST ROLE? REF: A. OSLO 90 B. 06 OSLO 1047
Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Kevin M. Johnson for reasons 1.4 b and d
Dokumentene
Internettstedet Wikileaks har fått tak i mer enn 250 000 dokumenter fra amerikanske ambassader og konsulater verden over.
Aftenposten har fått tilgang til alle dokumentene uten noen form for klausuler.
Dokumentene blir fortløpende vurdert som grunnlag for artikler etter de samme redaksjonelle kriterier og etiske regler som ellers i Aftenpostens journalistikk.
E-post til redaksjonen:
wikileaks@aftenposten.no
1. © Summary: Norway aspires to be a leader in Middle East peace negotiations and could be a genuine asset in bringing peace to the region. Norway´s diplomatic principles, focus on dialogue, and mediation history have helped raise Norway´s profile as a peacemaker. Its tense relationship with Israel and anti-Semitism in Norway, as well as its approach to Hamas and Hamas positions, could constrain the effectiveness of Norway´s desired high-profile mediator role. Part II of this cable series explores the growth of anti-Semitism in Norway and Part III analyses Norway´s Foreign Minister´s critical role in elevating Norway on the world stage. End Summary. Norwegian Diplomacy:
Strengths and Desire for a Big Role
----------------------
2. © Shaped by FM Stoere, Norwegian foreign policy prioritizes peace promotion. Stoere is a skilled foreign minister, drawing on national traditions of international engagement, and adding his own focus on humanitarian aid and peace promotion to create an appealing portrayal of Norway as a world leader in peacemaking. Stoere dearly desires a central role in shaping Middle East peace and believes he has the ability to deliver. Norway brings clear strengths to the table. Stoere has been careful to maintain constant ties with Hamas (although no longer on the political level), steady and significant support for the Palestinian Authority and continued regular ties to Israel. Norway has a global reputation for expertise in peace negotiations in Guatemala, Tibet, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka among others, although their efforts have floundered lately. Norway also willing to spend substantial money in the promotion of peace. Norway´s non-EU membership can also at times be helpful. (Practically, Norway follows the vast majority of EU positions but has diverged, most notably in holding talks with the Tamil Tigers and Hamas, EU designated terrorist groups.)
Mediation Expertise
-------------------
3. © Norwegian society values dialogue above all. Talk, even without any expectation of results, is seen as valuable. Anyone who draws a line and refuses to talk to an opposing party is seen as a radical unilateralist. Conversely, Norwegians are extremely opposed to the use of military force to achieve goals, no matter how laudable.
4. © Compounding this aversion to force, Norwegians do not generally see any threats. For example, they do not see a danger from terrorism. (This attitude prevails in the MFA and other elites, despite FM Stoere´s hotel being attacked by suicide bombers in Kabul.) This societal attitude was demonstrated by Norway´s first terrorist case. Despite shooting at Oslo´s synagogue, planning to behead the Israeli ambassador and to attack the Israeli and U.S. embassies, the accused was convicted only of grave vandalism (although his strict sentence showed some understanding of the severity of the charges).
5. © Finally, Norway has substantial funds to back any mediating role it chooses to play. Rich with energy funds, it has for years been a leading donor to the Palestinian authority, most recently chairing the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee. Historically, it has been willing to commit to the long-term, funding projects to promote peace in Sri Lanka for example for over 27 years.
6. © Norway´s desire to make a difference combined with the willingness to expend time and money has made it a mediator in conflicts as far a field as Sri Lanka, Colombia, Haiti, and Sudan. It has elevated peace and reconciliation studies in its universities and reorganized its Foreign Ministry to showcase its expertise in this area. It revels in its self-described role as the ""moral superpower"" and points to the Oslo Peace Accords as a defining national moment.
Norway´s History with its Jewish Community and Israel
-----------------------------------------------------
7. © In the Middle East, however, its history may constrain the role it can play. Norway´s Jewish community has always been very small and based in the country´s biggest cities, Oslo and Trondheim. Challenges confronted the community early on. The birth of modern Norway was its 1814 constitution, which included a clause excluding Jews (later removed in 1851). In German-occupied Norway, Norwegian police cooperated with the Germans, rounding up almost all of the Norwegian Jewish population, most of which were sent to concentration camps.
8. © Post-war Norway cultivated close ties with Israel and much political support existed for Israel. The Norwegian Labor Party (long the dominant party in Norway) has historically had close ties to Israel´s labor party and Golda Meir visited Oslo and reportedly had a friendly personal relationship with Norwegian PM Gerhardsen. This resulted in Norway secretly providing heavy water to the fledgling Israeli nuclear program.
9. © The 1990s Oslo Process thrust Norway into Middle East politics for the first time and seemed to herald peace in the Middle East as well as a new peacemaker role for Norway. As the Oslo Accords crumbled, ties between Norway and Israel weakened. The Lebanon wars had a major impact, with approximately 20,000 Norwegians serving in UN peacekeeping forces in Lebanon from 1978 to 1998. These soldiers came home with sympathetic reports about Palestinian refugees and negative impressions of Israelis. Israeli settlements and walls in the West Bank, and invasions of Lebanon and Gaza contributed to Norwegians´ increasingly negative view of Israel.
10. © This shift was so dramatic that a 2006 cartoon in a major newspaper depicted the PM of Israel as a concentration camp guard. During the 2006 war in Lebanon prominent author Jostein Gaarder made a statement saying ""I refuse to recognize the state of Israel"" and characterized Judaism as ""an archaic national and warlike religion."" (See septel and ref B for a detailed discussion of anti-Semitism in Norway.) By 2007, FM Stoere decided to recognize the Palestinian Unity Government, which included Hamas Ministers. Hamas´ vow to destroy Israel was ignored or characterized as only rhetoric by the Norwegians. Norway became the leading dissenter to international norms (only joined by Switzerland), willing to overlook Hamas´ stated aims in pursuit of dialogue at all costs. At this point, some Israeli officials began to characterize Norway as the most anti-Israel state in Europe.
(Note: Although the GON would deny it, there are clear signs that contacts with Hamas go beyond a tactical desire for dialogue to a level of sympathy for Hamas positions. The FM once told DCM for example that one could not expect Hamas to recognize Israel without knowing which borders Israel will have. While the FM expresses some sympathy for Hamas´ positions only in unguarded moments, other prominent Norwegians go further. End Note.)
11. © Norway´s growing minority population also plays a role in hardening public attitude toward Israel. The primary minority groups in Norway (25% of Oslo´s population) are Muslim and stem from Pakistan, Iraq, Somalia, and Afghanistan. They are interested in Middle East politics and not surprisingly very critical of Israel. (See reftel A.) ""Traditional"" Norwegians are independently quite critical of Israel as discussed above, but it is likely that this viewpoint will be re-enforced by the growing minority groups in Norway.
Gaza´s Impact
-------------
12. © The recent Gaza war further hardened anti-Israel attitudes in Norway´s public and elite opinion, with the notable exceptions of the Progress Party (about 25% of the vote) and the small Christian Democratic Party. However the size of recent pro-Israel (500) and anti-Israel demonstrations (over 10,000) illustrate the prevailing sentiments. (See reftel A.)
13. © Since the Gaza war, the question of whether anti-Semitism is on the increase became the subject of an intense public debate. Much of the debate centers on defining when comments by public figures are or are not anti-Semitic. Press coverage and public opinion of the Gaza war was overwhelmingly, and at times vehemently, anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian (viewing Israeli tactics as brutal and Palestinians as innocent victims). Therefore the question of anti-Semitism has often been phrased in terms of when criticism of Israel crosses the line into anti-Semitism. (See septel for a detailed discussion of the strong comments that have been made by leading Norwegian politicians questioning the ability of Jewish members of the Obama government to give unbiased advice and outlining the sense of threat felt by the Norwegian Jewish community.)
14. © On the official level, Hamas´ rocket attacks against Israel received criticisms, but the clear focus of Norwegian diplomacy encouraged Israel to be restrained and to maintain dialogue. While FM Stoere has been careful to criticize both parties, Norway clearly places most of the blame for the conflict on Israel´s policies.
Israel´s Reaction
-----------------
15. © The Israel Government has chosen, according to an Embassy official, to take a very low key approach to Norway´s negative views towards Israel. They see no point in openly pressing the government. With GON Ministers and Vice Ministers having a track record of meeting with Hamas, calling for boycotts of Israel, and showing up at violent anti-Israeli riots, the Israel Embassy holds out very little hope that the current GON can ever act moderately towards Israel. That said, they appreciate that the GON MFA is disciplining one of its own for anti-Semitic emails and that an initial meeting between FM Stoere and the Israeli Ambassador was very positive. They hope that small steps suchQs an R&D agreement may bring some slight warming of relations.
16. © However, the Israeli Embassy official noted that while his view of the GON may be negative, the view of Norway in the GOI is even less positive, and the view of the Israeli public which sees only negative items about Norway in the media is even less. Therefore, while Israel can tolerate Norway being the Chair of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Palestine (ADHL), the idea of any greater role for Norway in Middle East talks is unpalatable.
Comment
-------
17. © Norway, and particularly their charismatic Foreign Minister, has a strong interest in playing a peacemaker role. With money to spend and open channels to all parties in the conflict, they bring important assets to this role. However, Norway´s attitudes towards Israel and Hamas also constrain Norwegian diplomatic efforts in the Middle East. Norwegian public and elite opposition to most of Israel´s actions and their view that Israel does not value dialogue is widely reported. A level of Norwegian sympathy for some Hamas´ positions, hidden behind its broad policy of dialogue with all, should be kept in mind as we engage with Norway on U.S. Middle East priorities. End comment.
WHITNEY
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass