NORWAY: CHANGING DIRECTION IN LATIN AMERICA AND

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 OSLO 000302 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 12/11/2017 TAGS: PREL EAID PHUM WHA AF NO SUBJECT: NORWAY: CHANGING DIRECTION IN LATIN AMERICA AND AFRICA? REF: OSLO 217 Classified By: DCM Kevin M. Johnson for reasons 1.4 b and d ¶1. (C) SUMMARY: The recent visit of Cuba Transition Coordinator Caleb McCarry underscored the growing GON interest in engagement with Latin America. Much of this interest comes from the "Super Minister" of Development and Environment, Erik Solheim, who has taken the lead in South America as FM Jonas Gahr Store focuses his energies elsewhere. Several commentators have noted that this amounts to an abdication by Store of his role in the Americas, something that has allowed Socialist Left party member Solheim to increase ties to the leftist governments in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Cuba. Although Norwegian engagement and interest in African issues remains high, it appears development aid to Latin America will take a larger share. END SUMMARY. NEW ENTHUSIASM FOR THE AMERICAS, AT LEAST BY SOLHEIM ¶2. (C) Norwegian diplomatic efforts around the world are in flux under the leadership of FM Store and his energetic attempts to re-christen Norway as a diplomatic superpower through peace-making efforts. Policy in Latin America seems to have been an afterthought in Store's vision. The FM's comment to colleagues in 2006 regarding his areas of concern for the MFA was that "My number one priority is the Middle East - and there is no number two." With Store's interest engaged elsewhere, Development and Environment (D&E) Minister Solheim has taken a more substantial role in developing government policy in Latin America. Representative Peter Gitmark, of the Conservative party, who is very engaged in human rights and foreign policy issues, labeled Store's narrow focus as 'abdication' of the FM's responsibilities on Latin America. This frustrates Gitmark and the Conservative party, as Minister Solheim (a staunch member of the Socialist Left),has quietly tied Norway closer to Venezuela and Bolivia (and to a lesser extent, Cuba) to support the socialist movements in those countries. ¶3. (C) When the U.S. Consulate in Minneapolis was closed, Norway opened a new embassy in Bolivia, a move taken by some to indicate interest in the current MFA to shift Norwegian focus from traditional partners to new opportunities. Solheim has visited Bolivia twice to meet with leadership there, and has made approving comments about the 'leftist wind' sweeping through the continent. Even Chavez receives only back-handed criticism from him, as Solheim noted that his actions are 'not as bad as historical U.S. interference in the region.' ¶4. (C) Some of this can be laid at the feet of Norwegian oil and gas interests in the area, and Bolivia has been added to the Oil for Development Program and has nationalized it gas resources using Norway as a model, leading to increased exchange between the countries. But Minister Solheim is keenly focused on climate change, and in the wake of Norway's pledge of about 600 million USD at the Bali conference to protect rainforests, it is reasonable to assume that he will direct substantial Norwegian efforts towards protecting South American forests around the Amazon basin, including Bolivia and Venezuela. AFRICAN AID REEXAMINED ¶5. (C) Although the PM, FM, and Minister Solheim have toured Africa in the last few months, Norwegian diplomatic efforts in Africa are shifting away from traditional aid to a focus on political diplomacy and health and educational support. This new philosophy may have the added advantage of freeing up money and personnel that Solheim and Store appear to feel are entrenched in an aid system that Norwegians have 'naively' (Solheim's comment) supported with unquestioning enthusiasm in past decades. In addition to media (and government) criticism of food and equipment aid to Africa (donating used military trucks being a prime example of good intentions that led to misuse and media scorn),Ministers Solheim and Store have made more and more mention in public speeches and articles about the importance of re-directing assistance away from 'traditional aid' (not usually defined) to more strategic aims that combat corruption, tax shelters, and the effects of climate change. Quietly, there have also been discussions about reducing Norway's annual quota of refugees, as African populations in Norway have been the least successful at finding employment or achieving higher education in Norway. ¶6. (C) Solheim has announced that future Norwegian efforts in OSLO 00000302 002 OF 002 African development will be to 'affect the money streams' by encouraging the fight against corruption and aiding governments to better harness their own resources for broad social gain through programs like Oil for Development. In essence, Norway will encourage nationalization of resources. While logical, following Norway's experience with their own oil fund and the current government's socialist tendencies, it is not likely to receive broad support from EU partners or the U.S. The GON's 2008 budget submitted to parliament cuts aid to Africa by 14 million USD. NEW FOCUS ON LATIN AMERICA ¶7. (C) In a speech in March 2008, Solheim noted that previous Norwegian areas of focus in Latin America (political change in Chile and Argentina) had become obsolete, and that he wanted the GON to focus on three new priorities: rain forest protection and environmental issues, oil and gas development, and businesses' 'social responsibility' and interactions with governments. For example, Norway recently announced a new joint project with Cuba, Spain, and Switzerland (Reftel),is expanding its presence in Bolivia, has completely redone the South America 'Bureau' which will now be under the leadership of rising star Hege Araldsen, and is looking for new areas of involvement. This will hopefully be more nuanced that the ham-handed attempt in 2006 to export the 'Norwegian model' of 'sharing national resources' to Brazil that struck officials in Brazil as a rather tactless lecture to them about how to use their natural resources. ¶8. (C) COMMENT: All of the areas of focus suggest that there is renewed interest in Latin America, an interest by the current government to work closely with socialist leadership, and a budget that will give Norway increased clout in these areas in the immediate future. Whether Africa is moved down the list of priorities as a result of this remains to be seen, but the public pronouncements suggest that there will at the very least be a change in Norwegian diplomacy on the continent that may result in less fiscal assistance. END COMMENT. WHITNEY