Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
08OSLO568
2008-10-23 06:31:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Oslo
Cable title:  

NORWEGIANS SUPPORT DEALERT RESOLUTION, AND UNHAPPY

Tags:  PARM MNUC UNGA NO 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHNY #0568 2970631
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 230631Z OCT 08
FM AMEMBASSY OSLO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 7104
INFO RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO PRIORITY 1532
C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 000568 

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/22/2018
TAGS: PARM MNUC UNGA NO
SUBJECT: NORWEGIANS SUPPORT DEALERT RESOLUTION, AND UNHAPPY
WITH NATO SECRETARIAT

REF: STATE 111744

Classified By: Political Counselor Kristen Bauer for reasons 1.4 (b) an
d (d)

C O N F I D E N T I A L OSLO 000568

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/22/2018
TAGS: PARM MNUC UNGA NO
SUBJECT: NORWEGIANS SUPPORT DEALERT RESOLUTION, AND UNHAPPY
WITH NATO SECRETARIAT

REF: STATE 111744

Classified By: Political Counselor Kristen Bauer for reasons 1.4 (b) an
d (d)


1. (C) SUMMARY: Norway will support the nuclear dealerting UN
resolution assuming the text is similar to last year's, which
they also supported. Our MFA interlocutor was upset that
false rumors had surfaced that Norway would co-sponsor the
resolution. He was also unhappy with several statements
that he perceived to be misleading in the NATO International
Secretariat's 16 October memorandum on Disarmament
Resolutions. End Summary.


2. (C) Poloff met with Bjorn Midthun, Assistant Director
General, MFA section on disarmament and nonproliferation to
deliver reftel demarche. Midthun said that he believed that
a dealert resolution along the lines of last years' was
"balanced" and repeatedly pointed out that it commends
nuclear states for recent initiatives and steps taken.
Midthun emphasized that these commendations were primarily
intended for the US, as "the Russians are the problematic
ones."


3. (C) Midthun stated that "dealerting is not in conflict
with the strategic concept of NATO, and we are encouraged
that other members feel the same way."


4. (C) Midthun was visibly irritated with several statements
in an October 16 Memorandum from the NATO International
Secretariat to the NPG Staff Group, DPP(NPD)(2008)0066, on
the same subject as reftel. Underlining the relevant
passages for poloff, Midthun said that the memorandum is "not
written at an acceptable level of precision." In paragraph
3, he pointed to the fact that both of last year's
resolutions were mentioned in the same sentence, along with
the words "hair-trigger alert" and "limited steps." Midthun
said that both of these terms were found only in one of the
resolutions--the so-called "India" resolution, and not the
dealerting resolution--and that there seemed to be a willful
conflation of these two resolutions. Norway did not support
the "India" resolution (A/C.1/62/L.21),and Midthun was upset
that supporters of the dealert resolution were being lumped
together with those talking about "hair trigger" alerts and
"limited steps" taken by nuclear powers.


5. (C) Furthermore, Midthun spoke at length about the last
sentence in paragraph 3, which states, "...given the current
state of readiness and the safety and security measures in
place, it is impossible for the Alliance's nuclear weapons to
be accidentally, unintentionally or inadvertently launched."
Midthun said that the word "impossible" was entirely
inappropriate as "things can go wrong."


6. (C) Elaborating and relaxing somewhat, Midthun said that
"fear of accidental launch is not what is driving our support
of this dealert resolution." He then spoke about Norway's
general ideal of a nuclear-free world, and toward that end,
reducing the role of nuclear weapons in the security arena is
a good thing. Poloff discussed our view of the issue, that
having weapons on alert is a functional component of our
security and deterrence strategy. Midthun had no direct
response, but spoke of the symbolic importance of stepping
back from a nuclear precipice.


7. (C) Becoming somewhat animated again, Midthun said that
rumors of Norway's co-sponsorship of the dealerting
resolution were completely false, and that Norway had never
intended to co-sponsor the resolution. When asked if it was
absolutely certain that Norway would support it, Midthun said
that so long as the draft remained in its current form,
almost identical to last year's, he believe Norway would
support it.


8. (C) Comment: Midthun was upset, apparently not by our
demarche but by the NATO memorandum. Poloff got the sense
that Midthun genuinely believes that the dealerting
resolution is not inconsistent with NATO policy, and the
International Secretariat's memo was bullying. Perhaps this,
combined with the supposedly false rumors that Norway was
going to co-sponsor the resolution, led Midthun to adopt a
defensive posture. Post believes there is little chance that
the GON can be convinced to abstain or vote no on the
dealerting resolution. End comment.
WHITNEY