Welcome to Sideline, the podcast for the politically
homeless.
And for those who feel that they are
alive.
Around the house today.
The torch lights and carries Trond Sørensen and
myself, Vegard Nuttnes.
That was a cue.
Now you have to go out and buy
tickets.
Because now you will meet up and go
by train, folks.
Then time and place and ...
Yes, that's more important that you have control
over us.
Yes, I can take it.
Wednesday at 4.30 p.m. Then we
meet at The Lannister.
Then there is a torchlight train for Maria
Corina Marchado.
I do not know if I said it
correctly, but I try as best I can.
The one who won the peace prize.
Arne, you have to come here to take
the Spanish pronunciation.
But anyway.
There it is to go by train.
Torchlight train for her.
Because we will do that since this association,
which one of those who have gone with
torches, has decided that they will not participate.
Then we do it instead.
Right.
She is simply on the right side, she,
Marchado.
Yes.
And that's too bad.
Then you can not be democratically established.
No.
Despite the fact that you are trying to
become a dictator to introduce democracy, you are
a coward because you want to become a
wrong dictator.
So we have to go by torchlight train
then.
Yes.
But we look forward to that.
So you meet at The Lannister at 4
.30 p.m. and then you go by
train a little later.
But we start there so that people can
get something to eat.
I think at six o'clock is the
official time.
Yes.
I think the official torchlight train is an
hour's time or something.
Yes.
Then they will be waving at everything else
at the hotel or the balcony or whatever.
Yes.
Then we will try to get hold of
it.
We have a torchlight train there, but feel
free to bring it.
Yes.
It is sold at some type, Claes Olsson
and so on and so on.
So it's things that are available to get
hold of, does not cost much.
It's a relatively cheap thing to use.
That's great.
Then we have said that.
But it's Wednesday.
Are we going to move on to something
else heavier internationally?
Yes, we have turned on an international tone
here with peace price and all.
Yes.
You trade locally, I think globally, yes.
Yes.
But there is more and more instability in
this world we live in, Trond.
Yes.
New alliances emerge, old institutions disappear.
And a resource struggle is emerging, perhaps.
Geopolitics is a lot about access to resources
and either people or people or minerals or
whatever.
And in Norway we have thought that if
we keep our heads in the ground long
enough, we can continue with our used guns
and our constructive attitude towards international institutions.
It worked so damn well in the 90s.
Yes, it did.
But they die in vain, and new things
emerge.
And one of those things is, now the
army was out in the field, and could
say that they have ordered four submarines, but
there will be two more.
And it will not be cheap.
No.
I understand that a submarine is something that
becomes expensive.
Yes.
But we now pay the same for two
submarines as we paid for the first four.
And that's a little weird.
Yes, I have to say, I think it's
a little weird, but what do I know.
So then they have to be able to
pacify Russian nuclear submarines, I think.
Yes, that's probably what they should be able
to do.
So that's probably the whole point of a
submarine defense, to be able to, on the
one hand, take out other submarines, on the
other hand, be offensive or defensive without being
seen.
Yes.
But in the defense policy, there is a
clear movement in the direction of, shall we
say, realism in Norwegian politics.
Here, frigates must be bought, there must be
strategically reasonable cooperation, when we see that the
United States is falling out of the periphery,
seen from our perspective.
Submarines are bought from Germany.
And then there has become a new defense
agreement.
Yes.
With Great Britain.
We just invited them a week or 14
days ago, and they took it to heart
and said, this was a good idea.
Everyone listens to us.
Yes.
But it is very natural, we said it
that time, it is very natural that they
join this joint command, which is Norway, Sweden,
Finland, Denmark, Iceland.
Yes.
And also Great Britain.
Yes.
And it is strictly not the same order,
I think.
I think this is a bilateral thing, but
cooperation is in anyway.
So the idea here is that British forces
get a larger and more permanent role in
the defense of Norway.
And I have to say that I feel
equal.
I was commanded at the Bardufoss airport almost
30 years ago.
And one of the roles I had there
was to be a liaison officer with British
forces, because they had a permanent training base
there called Clockwork.
So I had a British corporal who was
twice as old as me as such an
opponent.
And that was in itself both instructive and
interesting.
And I also learned that the beer the
British forces had at the barracks was much
stronger than what we had here.
Better beer, simply put.
I don't know if I thought it was
so much better then, because I drank as
usual, and then I got so full that
I couldn't stand on my feet afterwards.
That can be painful.
Yes, it was very unpleasant.
But step by step, European alliances are building
up, strengthened European defense, everyone is rising up,
spend more money, and have a clearer strategic
view that no longer has the security net
that the US has had mentally.
And it's a bit like that, because Trump
has not said that he does not want
to be a part of NATO, but it
has been interpreted that way.
And then Trump has said that you have
to start building your own defense.
And that's what you actually do in Europe
now.
Yes, and to be precise, it's not just
Trump who has said that.
All American presidents have said that since Reagan,
that you have to sharpen yourself.
Yes.
So Obama was also pretty hard on that.
And Jens Stoltenberg, when he was NATO chief,
was also pretty hard on that.
And then there is the geopolitical reality, which
makes it sink in, where Trump's re-election
is one of the geopolitical realities, where you
see these absurd agreement proposals in the war
between Ukraine and Russia, which Europe and European
powers have no influence over, because we are
just irrelevant, because we have not done our
job for so many years.
And then there is no longer a reserved
seat at the table.
And then you actually have to start tidying
up a bit in your own living room.
And it looks like you do.
And then it is interesting that this 28
-point plan, or whatever it is, it is
quite obvious that it will not be anything.
And then I saw an interesting, yes, partly
statistic, partly analysis here the other day, so
you do surveys, such Gallup stuff in the
US, right?
Who do you want to win the war
between Ukraine and Russia?
Which side do you support?
Should we send weapons?
Should we uphold our NATO obligations?
From an American perspective.
And what comes out of that statistic is
that it is overwhelming support.
Both for Ukraine, for NATO, for obligations.
And it's not nonsense either, it's like 65
% support Ukraine and 11% support Russia.
And then there are some uncertainties.
But that Trump-Vance, all sides are of
the same mind, is obviously not reflected in
the American people.
The support for NATO is overwhelming, and what
can be mentioned is that there is a
loose percentage in the local world, right?
Because there are 35% who do not
support Ukraine, and that sounds a bit high.
But as long as that war has gone
on, that number has never been lower.
So there is the greatest support for Ukraine
right now in the American people, according to
these surveys, than there has been at any
point in time before.
And that is mildly surprising to me.
It must be a bit surprising for peace
prize winner, Trump, to help carry.
Trump made me look at a drawing in
a building sports team.
So-called football World Cup.
FIFA World Cup.
That is the silliest I have ever seen.
Yes, it is very, very, it should be
said.
The building original who directed it, he can
get a picture of me.
The FIFA president.
And then there was someone to be the
host, except for him.
But now this FIFA president is not ...
He is not the most popular person out
there.
Gianni Infantino is a Swiss by birth.
But he has fled from Switzerland to Qatar.
And that's because maybe that's where it would
have been best to live after having given
the football World Cup to Qatar.
And no one really wanted them to have
it, but he wanted it.
And he is a corrupt devil.
That's probably his general view, that he is
the world's most official mafioso, corrupt, bandit thing.
And FIFA is a shit organization.
A shit organization that has a set of
rules that they completely threw off the boat
to be able to make a peace agreement
that could be made to be able to
give to Trump.
That was so embarrassing.
It was so embarrassing.
Obama had promised to be embarrassed about getting
the real peace agreement on a failing foundation.
While Trump seemed like he took this peace
agreement with a straight back.
Yes, he has asked for this, and as
far as I understood, this peace agreement came
to the table as a consequence of him
not getting the peace agreement.
Then he apparently called Gianni and said, you
have to make a peace agreement with me.
And he was really careful in his faith
in sabotaging football in the USA.
In the meantime.
To create an incentive structure.
Yes, but there are some of these cities
that we may have to declare not safe
to arrange a football World Cup.
So then you can't have a football World
Cup in these cities.
Because they are not safe.
And then he made a peace agreement to
him, and then he was so satisfied that
people could play wherever they wanted.
This is such an old man who has
gone through childhood.
It was really, really weird to watch.
It looked like a meeting at a bar.
A bar revue.
Yes.
Or a local Dig Dugnal was probably what
we meant.
How does such a person have influence over
anything?
And the direction of that stuff.
I see that people who are interested in
football also think this was totally cruel.
Yes, yes.
Just throwing away time, right?
For hours.
With nonsense and a peace price.
And you say to me, right, that you
have to follow this, Vegard.
And then there is a so-called withdrawal,
where you should withdraw something by chance, but
everyone withdraws their own country.
Yes, that was planned.
Yes, no one understood that.
The three world nations are supposed to be
first in each group.
So they didn't really need to withdraw.
They just knew which group they were supposed
to be in.
So this is dramaturgy for an 11-year
-old.
Yes.
Because everyone knows that the opening match was
supposed to be from that group, and go
to Mexico, and be with Mexico, right?
So it was just fixed.
So there were some matches that you already
knew when to go.
And you just had to make a lot
of nonsense out of it.
And this was even when Trump made a
little mistake.
Even he understood that this was just to
get these people on stage again.
Even Trump has longer social antennas than the
original picture.
Yes, and that's a good thing.
And after all that was going on there,
I realized that we got the death group.
Yes, this is the thing.
Sorry, France got the death group.
Yes, because the analysis is as follows.
The group Norway ends up in is the
death group.
And this is not a Norwegian analysis.
This is how you look at it on
a global basis.
The group that Norway ends up in becomes
the death group, because Norway is third, but
everyone says that they are much, much better
than that.
They should probably have been second, but they
are not, because they haven't played well long
enough.
And it's been a long time since we've
had anything like this.
That's why it's the death group anyway.
And that was the last time we were
in the US too.
That was the death group.
There you end up with 4 points and
the same goal difference on all 4 teams.
Yes, okay.
I know that.
No, but it's a very, very special thing.
Was that when we beat Brazil?
Yes, we beat Brazil.
I hoped we would end up in the
group with Brazil, because we have a bit
of experience with that.
Yes, so we have never lost.
Norway has never lost a football match to
Brazil.
And it is the only nation in the
world that has not lost to Brazil, that
has played against them.
There are a lot of things I don't
know about here.
Yes, we have good statistics there.
I understand that Brazil is good.
Yes, they have always been the world's best
football team.
But...
It's a country team.
But they are...
Yes, so I understand now.
It was France and Spain that you didn't
want to have.
And then there is Argentina and Brazil.
Yes, and then we got Senegal from Africa,
who are also very good.
Yes, and they were in the second group.
So that was the best you could get
there.
And then Norway was the best you could
get in the third group.
Yes.
So we are at the top of each
group.
Yes, I think that's good.
Then we get...
The downside is that we got matches that
go at a time when it is not
allowed to serve alcohol.
And that's actually the headline from VG.
Yes, it is Norwegian alcohol politics that is
challenged.
Let's hope that can lead to a little
adjustment in the rules and such.
It would have been nice with a little...
Now we have allowed serving until 5 o
'clock in the morning, because the match actually
ends at 3 o'clock.
But that's not what we were supposed to
talk about.
Football.
But...
It wasn't.
No.
But it was at least international football.
Yes.
But it was a little too much fun
to talk about Trump and Gianni and FIFA
and such.
Let it be.
Yes.
No, no.
It will be more...
It will be tight football coverage here on
the sidelines, I think, when we approach the
World Cup.
Yes.
I suspect that we will look at a
lot outside of sports.
Then of course I will watch football.
Without being too honest, I will of course
watch football.
Then you can come here and tell us
how it went.
Yes.
I think that if we get far enough,
you will be at the party anyway.
Yes.
When Norway beat Brazil last time, whether it
was the World Cup or what it was,
because I don't know what it was.
But I actually saw that match and was
at the party afterwards.
Yes.
Good atmosphere.
Yes, it was very tense.
But I don't think the football match was
so...
I don't remember anything from the football match.
I'm not going to go into details here.
It may have something to do with the
fact that I was not honoured when I
saw that match.
I remember that.
We were in the defence agreement with Great
Britain.
And that is a clear shift in Norwegian
politics, at least.
That we look more and more to Great
Britain to fill some of the vacuum that
the United States leaves behind.
The frigate purchase is a clear strategic link.
And then there is a concrete defence agreement
with British forces on Norwegian soil and all
that.
And the fact that we strengthen submarine weapons.
Because it was...
Ordered four, had an option of some more
to use that option, even though it was
damn expensive.
It's a bit like that, that I offer
questions.
I suspect that the demand for submarines has
risen quite a bit.
But it's also the price.
That's probably right.
And it's not like we're living in an
inflation-free time either.
Of course, when there are a few years
in between, it's been 56 years since we
ordered the first four, so it has increased
a bit on several fronts.
So that's how it is.
But it's not unfavourable for Great Britain, because
we're going to patrol the same sea areas.
The area between Greenland and Norway, with Iceland
and Great Britain in it, is an essential
strategic sea area.
And not to mention Svalbard as well.
I think that the most important function of
the submarines is to be able to block
the way in to where the Russian northern
fleet holds when it is not on the
sea.
Oh yes, on the Kola Island.
We just lie down outside and just block
the way.
Yes.
That's probably popular.
Yes.
If necessary, we can close there.
That would be nice.
And they have another place a bit further
in, in Russia, where there are a lot
of submarines.
It's a bit further in, and it's such
a cramped and difficult area to get into.
Yes, but the northern fleet is in Murmansk,
Kola Island and this area behind it, right?
And then you have Norway, Serbia and so
on.
Yes, that's what I was thinking.
Not Kola Island, but Murmansk and that part
there, but it's probably where the submarines are,
isn't it?
Yes, the entire northern fleet is stationed there.
And then you have the Baltic Fleet or
something like that, which is partly Kaliningrad, partly
St. Petersburg, but there it is cramped no
matter where they sail.
And then you have the Black Sea Fleet,
which is over to Brooklyn now.
A very strong submarine fleet.
Most of the ships are on the bottom
of the sea.
Yes, that's what I hear.
And then you have the Stirling Sea Fleet,
and it operates freely, but you can't do
much with it, because it's a part of
yours.
Instead of the four base areas that Russia
has.
I believe that the Ukrainians can manage to
reach out and take out some other systems
there as well.
They have shown themselves to be able to
...
Yes, it's almost continuous now, and they've been
working on that lately, that they're starting to
take out this shadow fleet for Russia.
Now there is a tanker and a cargo
ship that is smoking both here and there.
And I understand Ukraine's angle in that.
Russia tried to block the export from Ukraine,
they couldn't do it.
Ukraine exports, and now Ukraine responds with the
same mint and destroys the shadow export industry
to Russia, and they seem to be quite
successful with it so far.
We'll see how big and how much they
get, but now they send their own cruise
missiles against oil refineries, and I think the
average is that a couple of missiles go
every day, which takes out something industrial or
productive in Russia.
And that can be expensive for Russia's war
economy.
We'll see how well they succeed with it.
I think it was a bit of ...
Now there was something in Europe that didn't
think this 28 pound throw Ukraine to the
dogs plan was particularly good.
Yes, it was in the middle of the
tree.
Yes, but I have the impression that just
starting to take out that shadow fleet makes
Ukraine come in a slightly different position when
it comes to the front as well.
They don't need to let themselves be overtaken
to the same extent, because everyone understands that
if they continue to fight, it's not over
in three months or six months, but if
they take out the shadow fleet, they do
long-term damage to Russia's economy.
If your opponent is a competition, it's not
so easy to continue the war.
No, and it is.
I don't know how many ships are in
your shadow fleet, but it's not good to
say, because you don't know everything that is
and isn't, and it has other nations' flags
and such.
It can also be mentioned, I think all
the attacks on this shadow fleet and among
others the Turkish ship that was attempted to
sink, I'm not sure if it sank, but...
No, I don't think it did.
It was a bit low in the sea,
at least.
But as far as I have seen, there
have been systematic attacks that have not gone
beyond the crew.
Yes.
Beyond the fact that they had to leave
the ship.
So far, no deaths related to that, and
that's probably a wise approach from Ukraine.
I think that's very smart.
If you start attacking Turkish ships, and the
crew dies, it can happen that the Turks
start to mix up.
Yes.
In the wrong way.
Yes, and now it's not given that there
is...
The nationality of who is on board can
be anything, but the flag was Turkish on
one of these ships.
But that must be a bit risky for
the Turks too, that the ships with their
flag are rented out to this shadow fleet.
It may be less interesting if there is
a risk that the ship has to dock
to repair a hole.
It's costly.
Then it's not so interesting anymore.
That's a clear strategic part of it, from
the Ukrainian side, I would think, that you
do it a little unattractive to contribute.
What has also struck me is that they
have not taken out a tanker that has
gone up with oil.
When they have taken out, they have taken
out ships that go with ballast.
That is, just fill the tanks with salt
water and everything.
It's almost like they've made a wooden ball
and want them to do it.
Where they only have bunker oil for operation,
not full oil tanks to deliver.
Yes, and that is probably wise again, because
they are dependent on volunteers in the West,
and there are enough climate and environmental fanatics
here that they would have lowered their own
stars if there was any seafood that got
a black spot on it.
Yes, really well navigated geopolitics of Ukraine, I
would say.
Yes, at least it looks like that.
And then I'm going to give Russia's apologetics
right in one thing, and that is that
we get a rather skewed media image in
Norway, which is very friendly to Ukraine and
very hostile to Russia.
Yes.
And you can be aware of that, even
though I experience that right and wrong are
completely open doors, that Russia makes a mistake
in this conflict, and Ukraine has the right
on its side.
But that we get a rather skewed and
friendly image of Ukraine is relatively obvious.
I have talked to a Ukrainian, who is
not necessarily very political, but I was a
little interested in this corruption scandal in Ukraine,
where Zelenskiy's chief of staff had to leave.
And then I ask about these things that
...
Yes, there has not been a choice there,
right?
Not that it is actually illegitimate, because it
is a bit difficult to make a choice
when a seventh of your population is under
occupation and so on.
It can be a bit demanding.
Yes, and there are new soldiers on the
front lines, it's not so easy to ...
Yes, but that's the same.
Then I ask, yes, what is the feeling
on the ground in Ukraine?
Do you think Zelenskiy is involved in this?
That his personal is corrupt?
Yes, it is quite obvious that he is.
Of course.
His friends, his friends, his associates, he is
obviously corrupt.
Everyone is corrupt.
It is possible he is less corrupt than
others, but of course he is corrupt.
And then I talk about the situation in
Norway, and that the support for Ukraine is
still good, and then I get to Sweden,
but that's nice to hear and so on.
But don't send any money.
Yes.
Because everything is corrupt.
Send military equipment that cannot be used for
anything else, something that goes into the war
effort, and number it, so that you can
feel that every single thing is used in
the war effort, and not to be sold
on the black market or whatever.
So the support for their own authorities was
not the whole world.
No.
And this is just one person and one
point of view, but I had no expectations
that there would be a very clear, I
apologize, a Russian-speaking Ukrainian, who is clearly
on the Ukrainian side, no doubt about that,
and irritated by Russia and Russia's imperialism, but
also sufficiently committed to Ukraine's corruption and Ukraine's,
yes, rip in the skin.
Ukraine was an extremely corrupt country before this.
Unfortunately, it's a bit like those people who
were corrupt, they didn't think that maybe we
should let that be an advantage to defend
ourselves.
No, that's not true.
And then there are some, what do you
see?
Numbers that are completely insane, right?
There are 100 billion dollars that have been
lost to corruption.
A bit insane.
I actually have no intention or methodology to
understand the scope, because it is so foreign
to me.
So this Ukrainian I'm talking to, is asked,
yes, but in Norway, how much corruption do
you have here?
And then I answer, a bit Norwegian naive,
that we don't have formal corruption, like I
have lived here for almost 50 years, and
I have never experienced corruption.
Like I have never seen money in a
envelope under the table to get a job,
or at least not when there is something
publicly involved.
No, it's incredibly naive to think that there
is corruption everywhere, was the answer from the
Ukrainian.
And I agree that there is a lot
of weirdness in Norway, but the corruption, what
I would classify as corruption, goes through Stortinget.
Like, you have elected people from, take Einar
Førde, who gets his own statue back.
No, sorry, not Førde, I'm thinking of Opset.
A minister of society who has traveled to
Stortinget and brought home the goodies, right?
And gets the statue rebuilt, because there have
been so many motorways.
And it should be like this, yes, this
is legal corruption if you want, but it
is a corrupt intention, or something like that,
at least in my opinion.
But such servants who sell themselves, I have
to admit that I have never seen that.
No, it is something less, there is something
of it, I have seen some examples of
it, on some people in the municipal office
who have received money in order to build
houses, there has been something of it.
And then you had some, were there some
who allowed themselves to be corrupted in relation
to some purchase agreements for some buses a
few years ago?
That was also cash in hand in order
to justify their death, right?
I'm sure such things happen, but every time
something like this is revealed, it is so
embarrassing and career-destroying.
Yes.
Right?
It was just such a trivial matter, but
it was something about moss, or the sun,
or something like that.
Was there one guy who was going to
have something, I don't know, build something, or
something like that.
And then there was a friend of, I
think it was Valgjer Svarstad Haugland, or something
like that, and then Valgjer got involved and
called the municipality, or did something like, you
know who I am, and then it comes
out as a public matter, and it's like,
you don't have many legs to stand on,
as Valgjer did.
No, no.
And then the case was so small that
I don't think you got any major consequences,
or something like that, but it was like,
this is...
You get sanctioned very early in such a
process.
Yes.
It has consequences, quickly.
It does, and it should have.
And it's like, in those areas I think
Norway works quite well, because I think far
more people have so little lead in their
hands, over such power elites, that when someone
comes and tries to deal with the moss
like that, then it's quite a short way
to calling the municipality.
And then everyone is set on that if
that actually happened, then it should be on
the front page.
Yes.
Then we should, you should be allowed to
eat that.
You should be allowed to lie in that
bed when you first set it up.
Yes, and it's like, what is this former
party leader who had some sort of outhouse
that she hadn't built an apartment for, and
it's like, the smallest and biggest, what is
she now?
She is the minister who had built the
beach area.
Yes, demolished an outhouse to build a cabin.
And it's like, she got permission, while no
one else got it, right?
Yes.
And that is corruption in one way or
another indirectly.
But then it's also criticized, it's brought up
in the media, it's an embarrassing thing.
You are allowed to eat it.
Yes, and it's like, even smuggling, if it
is revealed, it comes up.
And I also think the risk of being
explicitly corrupt in Norway.
I know for myself that if I had
been exposed to it, sent a building application
or something, and then a bureaucrat calls back
and says, if I get 4000 kroner on
this account, then that building application can go
faster.
It's almost a bit strange that it doesn't
happen in some way, that some bureaucrats in
Oslo get money to actually do their job
a little faster.
But I just think, if I had gotten
that offer, then I would have put on
and not talked to this bureaucrat again, sometime,
but I would have gone to the media
and said that there is a corrupt bureaucrat.
It is completely unacceptable.
And it would have been like this, in
my head, completely, nothing can rest before this
four-night strike.
And we have strict rules.
And would it have gone the other way?
If I had said, you can get 10
,000 kroner in your hand to rush to
build my application, then my expectation would have
been that this bureaucrat would have called me.
Yes, like that.
And there is something about when you have
built a social structure that is trendy there.
And now I'm just talking from my own
point of view, then I think there is
little corruption.
We have some people from Bergen municipality who
go in there, one of these guys who
comes in, he is a very nice guy,
and he says, I am corrupt, because I
want coffee.
Yes.
And it is trendy so far, but corruption
is spreading.
Yes, and according to Norwegian rules, it can
still be corruption.
Yes, he said, I think it's okay to
get a cup of coffee when you come
into the office.
And he was a very nice guy.
And then there was one of the guys
who said, we're going out to eat and
have a few beers today, are you coming?
I can't.
I'm not allowed to.
There are clear rules for it.
And it makes sense.
Yes, it makes sense.
So I don't think it would have had
any special effect in that way.
But I don't think it would have played
any role if he got, it wouldn't have
affected his work, but it's just like he
has set the line so that he won't
get the opportunity to do it.
Yes, and perhaps the most highly profiled such
type-related case, is perhaps the Tønne case.
Yes.
Which Tore Tønne, former prime minister, who took
his own life after being dismissed or suspected
of being corrupt.
Because he had received a follow-up payment
from Stortinget, which he had a claim to,
but also received some money from some smuggling
company.
Via a well-known lawyer's association.
Via Bara.
Yes.
And I think there is a certain degree
of corruption on his private hands, and there
it is he, the Bara lawyer who proposed
this, Eriksen.
Yes, something like that.
Yes, or whatever his name is.
He couldn't be a lawyer, but he could
become a director in the Aker system in
Røkke.
Yes, that worked.
So...
The question is, was that corruption, or was
it like, you helped me with this, and
it cost you, so then you get...
Then I cover your back, because you did
the job for me.
But as a public servant in Norway, as
Tore Tønne was, and when those suspicions are
cast on you, and they hit hard, then
it's to the extent that you can't hold
out, that you get in the car and
take your life.
And that led to a discussion about media
coverage, and respect for ordinary people, and all
that, but it also shows how strong that
culture is, for not breaking the rules.
I've heard some call it conspiratorial thought, just
like Tønne, and how he got help, or
not, to just that.
And there are many...
There are many who think it's very strange
that such a guy had a gun, in
the first place.
Was it a gun?
I thought it was an Exos, was it?
No, it was a soldier, who shot himself
in a car, in a rest area.
Yes, okay.
I don't think it's hard to get a
gun, if you want one.
No, I don't think so.
But, okay.
Sad thing, but it illustrates some of the
attitudes to corruption in Norway.
Yes.
We talked about alliances, and it's not just
free and democratic countries that make alliances.
No, it happens that other countries do too,
like Russia, North Korea, for example.
Yes, and the eternal friendship with China.
Yes.
And then there is a group in West
Africa, who have found out that they are
going to have a so-called Sahel alliance,
where the military junta in Mali, as well
as in Niger and Burkina Faso, are strengthening
their cooperation.
Then they come up with many good ideas,
which are actually a bit recognizable here in
Norway.
Biometric ID cards, common currency, and therefore, to
cut off the bonds to colony France.
They have colony currency.
Yes, France is trying to boost the currency
they can use.
Yes.
And I understand that they are a little
annoyed by that.
Yes, it is quite reasonable to do just
that.
There is another one who is a little
annoyed by that.
It is Mrs. Meloni in Italy.
Yes.
She is chopping pretty hard and engaged in
Macron for his colonialism.
Yes.
Meloni has actually come to the conclusion that
it is time to sell all the gold,
or give all the gold the Italians have
to the Italians.
Yes, also.
Which is, because they have a gold reserve
for what?
150?
Yes, one of the world's largest, I think.
Yes, 150 billion euros or something like that.
It must be a significant gold reserve.
But what are they going to do with
it when they have run out of euros?
No, there is something with, they have a
significant state debt, which they could easily get
rid of.
I would have thought that when you get
rid of your state debt, you have to
take care of it by making a high
-profile promise to each other that we will
not enter such a state debt again.
So a constitutional amendment with that it is
actually not allowed.
Such early politicians cannot put us in a
new state debt without a clear plan of
payment and no reason to fund more debt
the next time.
You understand that you sometimes need credit.
You're going to rust up, or you're going
to do something.
But then you have to have built a
room to enter that credit.
And then you have to have some kind
of rule that says that when you first
do that, you have chosen.
Then you can not choose more credit for
new things afterwards.
Then you have to pay it down first
and so on.
And who knows.
Now it's a bit like what they have
in the US, where they have a VAT
bond.
It's just that they can vote for it
and lift that bond after a while.
That bond in the US is some of
the stupidest.
Yes.
It's...
Should we have a little more fire?
Yes, we do not have a law.
Yes, but we just move and change that
law for the last time.
Because we do this every year.
A very strange thing.
It is to that extent this Sahel alliance
gets some coverage in general.
Then there is coverage that says here are
some dictatorships that go together and form a
evil axis.
And that's fine.
Because it is.
Yes, it is.
It's shit whole countries, no doubt.
But I have to say, I hear a
little about French colonialism from others than Meloni.
It's not so much fun to talk about.
No, it does not seem so.
The thing is, what happens is that these
countries have a valid argument here, right?
They have a valid case when they say
that we do not want to fall under
French equality, we will in a way decide
for ourselves.
And that is a problem that they are
dictators.
Yes, and if I know the country in
that area correctly, then I do not think
they will do better on their own currency
than with the French.
So you can understand a French perspective in
that too, that the French are responsible, but
still better than ...
Irresponsible dictators.
Yes.
Yes, by all means.
And it's a bit ironic that you say
that there you want to get away from
the French currency, because we will decide for
ourselves, while in Argentina they say we would
very much like to be in a dollar
economy.
Because having our own currency does not seem
to be so good.
No, Argentina is a little further down the
street on having their own currency.
Yes.
So we'll see.
It does not look like there will be
a very immediate dollarization of Argentina yet.
But everyone knew that it would take some
time if you were to go there.
So we'll see what Millet gets.
But it is obviously an element of such
sovereignty in this new alliance in Africa.
And it is partly understandable, partly sad that
they are dictators, but a little difficult to
make a point of.
I have the impression that this French dominance
of the currency is quite lucrative for France.
There must be a reason why they do
it.
France must also take some money so that
they can make themselves more of a state.
Yes.
So we'll see.
But there is very little journalism on it.
And I could have actually thought to read
more about it, to understand more about it,
because the only place I pick up something
about it is in these speeches to Meloni.
And possibly she has cleaned Meli Bosen, but
they are also so rhetorically strong, i.e.
controversial, that they are perhaps more characterized by
being a rivalry with France and a criticism
of Macron.
So it can happen, there are some people
who are exposed here and there.
So I do not know what is really
true there.
I have not understood the system.
It may be that she just thinks that
the more I push for Macron, the greater
the chance it is that they get a
new election and get a new political leadership
or something like that.
And it is obviously politically favorable for Meloni,
so you should not take too good a
fish from what comes from there.
Or on the international arena, there is this
Project 2025, which was the painting for Trump's
second presidential term, according to some.
Yes.
It was such conservative environments that had put
together a plan to make it more effective
to get rid of what you should have
done in the four years you have.
There is an element that, yes, we can
read it more or less incorrectly.
We won't let anyone stop the US from
using our oil and gas.
And the US is now for the first
time energy-independent, which means that they care
much less about the Middle East than they
did.
And at the same time, there is a
pretty clear contrast to Norwegian energy policy.
Yes, here we have a very, very solid
energy-independent, and that should be completely black
and white.
Yes.
And there we have come a long way,
boy.
It's amazing what the politicians get when they
just put their minds to it.
Yes, or are we?
It's a question of who you ask.
If you ask anyone in MDG, they had
a huge victory in this state budget.
And if you ask the Labour Party people,
they say no.
What I know means that we will continue
to build out and perform for more oil
and gas production in Norway in the coming
years.
I suspect that the MDG line has just
killed itself now, because it is so unrealistic
and little connected to reality that there is
such a critical mass that does not care
anymore.
And now they are starting to get ...
I think that what first and foremost makes
this change, is that we are starting to
get a proper, good, professional opposition, don't you
think?
You have such sailors, and you have several
others who relate to the reality on the
ground, as we call it.
This is what reality is like, and then
you can fantasize that you have to create
a new reality, but it is not realistic.
Okay, we can make some weird statements that
you do not understand yourself, and other than
that, it will be as it will be.
We're going to do oil and gas, and
we're going to expand it.
Done.
It is quite obvious.
And when we talk about this geopolitical shift,
we are obviously entering an era of more
real political orientation.
And then there is hard power and not
soft power.
And minus nuclear bombs and military material, energy
is the main form of hard power, because
it is what you use for all kinds
of values.
I was about to say, very good climate
policy, would be that instead of delivering 35
% of the gas to Europe, Norway delivered
65% at the expense of Russian gas.
Yes, it must be relatively obvious.
It would have been very good climate policy,
because then the Russians would have lost the
war much faster.
And when they lose the war, it is
very bad for the climate to wage war
there, at least I think so.
They use a lot of energy to expand
values.
There has never been anything particularly good for
either economy or expansion.
No, the climate impact of the war is
quite significant.
Yes.
And that's what the type MDG and the
left have to do.
They have no problem looking past the climate
impact of the war.
No, they can actually do that.
When they are completely unambiguous in their support
for Ukraine.
And they should actually have that.
But at the same time, they want to
put in place a system where Europe is
more likely to be displaced by Russia than
by Norway on oil and gas.
And that is a self-evident, I think.
Yes, there is little connection in the halls
of politics there.
But I think the reality orientation that is
coming in the next few years, now that
you have that critical mass that is starting
to see, what should I say, the silver
lining, see symbolic politics for what it is
and real politics for what it is, then
I think you have to move very clearly
that we cannot risk an unstable energy network.
It does not work.
You have to have energy surplus to be
able to build new industries and to be
able to run the industry.
And all of it has to be competitive.
And Europe has to build itself up.
Europe has now built itself down over many
years.
You just have to turn that tree.
And what do you need then?
You need more energy so that the energy
becomes cheaper.
Yes, and you need very clear strategic autonomy.
And there you have to step back a
little from France.
They have always been very concerned about that.
So they have their, they see Rafale fighter
planes and their own nuclear weapons and everything.
Everything produced in France on the French production
line with French supply chains.
Not all the way, but as far as
practical, right?
And they build their own submarines and engage
in everything possible.
And it is not rational in the big
picture, because it costs.
But when you now build these alliances, we
are talking about the Nordic countries, Great Britain,
and certainly the Netherlands, Germany and Poland.
And that the supply chain is built up
within the alliance structures that make sense on
the ground.
So I think that energy policy issue will
also be brought into a clearer light pretty
soon.
Because it is so strategically important.
How do I see it?
Energy, if you have like, I think if
you have all the pillars for what is
needed for a good society, property rights, freedom
of expression, and so on and so on.
If you have a good amount of energy,
good energy, then you become a prosperous country.
Yes, and you can't wage war based on
windmills.
No, that doesn't work at all.
So there will probably be some nuclear power
in not too long.
There is a strong smell of nuclear power
in Norway in the short term.
I'm starting to think that we're going to
see spas on the ground in 2-3
years.
Yes, it almost has to be like that.
And then I think MDG and SV will
have to think about how they managed to
be climate-engaged for 15-20 years without
talking about nuclear power.
Yes.
It is so brain-dead.
Yes.
But it's about when you don't count on
things, the answers become weirder.
Yes, but you shouldn't count on it.
It's a penalty for coming to SV.
Yes.
But MDG should have had more control over
it.
Yes, but remember where they come from.
Yes.
It's the Germans, and this is a decision
by the German MDG, and it's a party
that in the meantime ...
They are fucking crazy.
They rose up to be against nuclear power,
in the meantime.
No, and there has been a continuous problem
with the climate movement, that it is built
on nuclear weapons.
Against them.
Yes.
And that has led to a lot of
shit.
But that's the way it is.
Maybe we'll go lighter earlier in the meeting.
Yes, I think so.
Shall we say it like that?
Yes.
Have a good time.
Thank you for listening to Sidelinja podcast.
Feel free to talk about us, like, share
and recommend us in your podcast app, or
share in the comment field on YouTube.
If you have any questions, suggestions, questions or
anything else, you can find all contact information
at sidlinja.transistor.fm.