From: <a href="http://www.aftenposten.no/spesial/wikileaksdokumenter/article3972765.ece">Aftenposten</a><br>
Date: 08.06.2007: 

<pre>
2007-06-08 13:16 

C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 
000614 
SIPDIS 
SIPDIS 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/08/2017 
TAGS:
MARR, PGOV, PREL, NO 
SUBJECT: POSITIVE MOVEMENT IN THE MISSILE 
DEFENSE DEBATE IN NORWAY BUT NO BREAKTHROUGH 
REF: A. STATE 21640 B. OSLO 177 C. OSLO 184 D. OSLO 382 
Classified By: 
Deputy Chief of Mission Kevin M Johnson for reasons 1.4 b and d 

1. (U)
SUMMARY: Lt. General Obering,s June 6 visit to Oslo, building
on Secretary Rice,s April visit and Embassy Oslo,s continued
outreach, has helped move the governmental and public debate
over missile defense in Norway in a positive direction. Norway
has not changed its basic skepticism of missile defense, most
recently demonstrated by Prime Minister Stoltenberg,s
comments, but both government and media commentaries show a
better understanding of the U.S.,s missile defense plans and a
willingness to counter Russia,s false narratives on this
topic. END SUMMARY

2. (SBU)
Lt. General Henry Obering, Director of the Missile Defense
Agency, held meetings on June 6 with the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, the Deputy Defense Minister and participated in a
open question and answer session with members of the media and
the public. Participants described the meetings as extremely
useful, and press reporting and commentary were generally
positive. General Obering,s briefings and comments to the
press helped continue the momentum begun on the missile
defense issue by Secretary Rice,s comment during the April
Oslo Informal NATO Ministerial in which she said that Russian
complaints on U.S. missile defense plans were purely
ludicrous. Her statement received much attention in Norway and
had an immediate impact in how members of the Norwegian
government spoke about Russian reactions to missile defense
plans.

Norwegian Questions 
----------------

3. (SBU)
Gen. Obering,s visit was the latest positive development in
our continuing efforts to challenge the Norwegian reluctance
to seriously look at missile defense and rebut inaccurate
Russian claims. Part of the Norwegian reluctance is due to the
fact that the document that forms the basis for the coalition
government, the Soria Moria declaration, clearly states
opposition to missile defense systems, without distinguishing
between large Star Wars type systems and those under
discussion now. Adding to this, the GON has also been very
reluctant to publicly criticize Russian behavior.

4. (C)
Gen. Obering,s presentations to the GON and to the media
clearly demonstrated the limited and defensive nature of the
current missile defense plans and the fallacies of the Russian
arguments. His answers to the questions raised by the MFA
regarding the technical challenges of missile defense, the
reliability of intelligence on the threat, the slippery slope
argument that the system could be expanded and questions
regarding the appropriateness of prioritizing missile defense
vs. other defenses against threats were comprehensive and
compelling. Journalists who asked similar questions were moved
to comment on how good his answers were.

Reactions
------- 
5. (SBU)
Statements by the GON on this issue have been greatly
improved, with the Defense Minister, the Deputy Defense
Minister and the Foreign Minister all saying publicly that the
U.S. missile defense plans are not a threat to Russia. The
Deputy Defense Minister, discussing the Soria Moria document
went so far to say, &amp;we now confront new challenges that
require new answers8. One discordant note was struck by the
Prime Minister, who while on a visit to Russia stated that it
was important not to have a new arms race and that Norway has
all along been skeptical to these plans and would not accept a
missile shield in Norway. He has been roundly criticized for
these comments in the media for making his comments while in
Russia and for not challenging Russia to muffle its Cold War
rhetoric. The editorial in Norway largest paper said that the
PM,s comments create the impression of Norwegian servility
towards Russia and called on the PM to make it clear that
Russia has no veto-power when it comes to missile defense in
NATO countries. It also advised the PM to tell Putin to muffle
his shrill Cold War rhetoric. We see this as significant
progress as media and other government figures who would most
likely have echoed the PM,s comments only a few months ago now
are critical.

6. (C)
The Prime Minister,s office and the MFA have claimed that the
PM,s comments reported in international media were taken out
of context and that he intended to promote dialogue and make
clear that Norway would not be used for any missile defense
systems. Further clarification of his remarks may be made next
week, added his staff.

7. (C)
Missile defense will remain a contentious issue for the
governing coalition, particularly for the Socialist Left
party. Their defense spokesperson, Bjorn Jacobsen, stated that
&amp;We are not skeptical, we are against missile defense8 and
criticized the prime minister along with the foreign and
defense ministers for not being forceful enough on this issue.
With these political realities, the best result we can expect
is for Norway to quietly continue work in NATO on missile
defense and to publicly criticize Russia for provocative
statements. Thanks to our high-level visitors this goal has
been achieved. The GON will continue to publicly stress its
fears of an arms race and may continue to ask skeptical
questions of missile defenses, but appears willing to politely
disagree with Russia on aspects of this issue. The progress we
have seen in government and media commentaries reflects a
better understanding of the issues behind missile defense,
including the threat from Iran, the technical basics of the
program and an understanding that Russian criticisms are
groundless.

Whitney 
</pre>