The negotiations on the so-called “Agreed Facilities and Areas (AFA)” began, at the US initiative in 2018 under President Trump and Prime Minister Erna Solberg and led to 4 military bases in 2021. They were followed up by President Biden and Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, and in 2024 the US received an additional 8 military bases in Norway. It was not as it is portrayed afterwards that Norwegian politicians wanted permanent US bases in Norway, as a protection against Russia. The background was a pronounced American request to have US military forces in allied countries and secure American “security inetersts”, not Norwegian ones. This is the same argument used for the US annexation of Greenland. In addition to the 12 military bases in Norway, the US has, over the past 5 years, entered into similar agreements for 35 military bases in Denmark, Sweden and Finland, so the US (not NATO) now has 47 military bases in the Nordic countries. Ten years ago, there were no such bases in the Nordic countries. If we include the Baltics, the number is 65.
There are two big and important questions that need to be asked: Are these military bases? Do they ensure Norwegian security or do they pose a security risk to Norway?
Are these military bases?
Our political and military authorities insist that these are not military bases, but rather very limited areas where Norway still has full sovereignty, the right to inspection and control and that it does not violate Norwegian base and nuclear weapons policy.
The basis is then the agreement’s Article I, paragraph 2, which states: ” All activities under this Agreement shall be conducted with full respect for the sovereignty, laws, and international legal obligations of Norway, including with regard to the stockpiling of certain types of weapons on Norwegian territory. Nothing in this Agreement alters Norwegian policies with regard to the stationing of foreign forces on Norwegian territory, and the stockpiling or deployment of nuclear weapons on Norwegian territory”
This sounds plausible and may seem reassuring, but if you go through the actual text of the agreement, you will quickly see that the intention from Article I, paragraph 2 is not followed up, quite the opposite.
The crucial point whether it is a foreign military base or not, and whether the agreement violates Norwegian sovereignty and base policy is the following: 1) who has the right of use? 2) what jurisdiction applies? and 3) what is the possibility of Norwegian control?
To 1): In Article III, paragraph 2 it says: ” In furtherance of such activities and purposes (i.e. everything mentioned in Article III, paragraph 1, my comment), Norway authorizes U.S. forces to control entry to Agreed Facilities and Areas, or portions thereof, that have been provided for exclusive use by U.S. forces. So, there is no doubt about who has the right of use, and it is “exclusive”.
To 2): “Norway waives its primary right to exercise criminal jurisdiction over members of US forces” (Article XII, paragraph 2) but can get it back when and if the US defense authorities find it “practicable” (Article XII, paragraph 3). Then it does not help that Article 1, paragraph 2 says: “full respect for Norwegian laws”
To 3): When it comes to control, it is based on trust and Norway has no right to inspect US aircraft, ships or containers, which all fall under “statal immunity”. There is nothing in the agreement that Norwegian authorities have the right to inspection and control. On the other hand, Article IV, paragraph 2 states: “U.S. forces shall have exclusive control over the access to, use of, and disposition of such prepositioned materiel….” Again, the word “exclusive” which in this context means “no one else”, including Norway. Any access will only be possible if the United States allows it. Then it does not help that Article 1, paragraph 2 says: “full respect for Norwegian sovereignty”
—
It is true that both Article III, paragraph 12 and Article IV, paragraph 5 state that Norway’s nuclear weapons policy shall be respected, but there is no possibility for the Norwegian authorities to control this.
So, the text of the agreement leaves little doubt:
– these are foreign military bases,
– where Norwegian sovereignty has been ceded,
– Norway has no possibility of control, including the storage of nuclear weapons
– it of course violates what has been Norwegian base policy since 1949.
” Agreed Facilities and Areas (AFA)” then becomes an Orwellian paraphrase of the realities, which primarily covers up the fact that it is a matter of surrender of sovereignty, which in turn is in violation of our constitution. This may explain why this paraphrase is so important to our political and military authorities.
Do the bases ensure Norwegian security or do they pose a security risk to Norway?
The key points here are 1) the US and Norway have common interests and 2) why Norway is interesting to the US
To 1) Henry Kissinger expressed this quite precisely: “America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests”. That is how it is, and that has been the case for a long time. What is new is that it is now presented in such a vulgar and unadorned form. We know from both Iraq and Afghanistan that the US only follows its own geopolitical goals and only defends what is in its own interests. The US leaves the scene when it no longer serves its interests. The military action against Venezuela and the demands for the annexation of Greenland follow the same logic and should make it crystal clear what the US military bases in Norway represent. In addition to being a clear violation of Norwegian sovereignty and our previous base policy, these bases give the US additional military control over Norway.
To 2) Norway is a central Arctic nation. We have large oil and gas resources, and between Svalbard and Jan Mayen we have large mineral resources. This of course makes us interesting to the US, but at the same time it makes us very vulnerable.
—
The US top leadership says outright that they must annex Greenland before Russia and China do. When our political and military authorities, and especially Norwegian intelligence, have been telling us for a long time that both Russia and China threaten us, you are providing a strong argument that the same logic can be used towards Svalbard and other Norwegian areas.
The US military bases in Norway therefore represent a security risk for Norway. Americans are welcome in Norway, but the US bases must be closed down.
By: Nikolai Østgaard, Antikrigs-Initiativet, Norway on the Global Days of Action to #CloseBases