Foreign minister Ine Eriksen Søreide (H) presented today for the government's Libya report, which came in september.
But the delegates had not discussed the report today, instead it is sent directly to the foreign and forsvarskomiteen.SMS-decision
It was Red-leader Bjørnar Moxnes to respond from The pulpit.
- There is a lack of open debate about foreign policy in the Parliament. It to go to war is one of the most serious decisions a state can take. When you took the decision, partly with text messages between ministers, there was no open debate in Parliament, said Moxnes.
Moxnes received support from SV leader Audun Lysbakken, but Anniken Huitfeldt (Labour party), Liv Signe Navarsete (Sp) and Michael Tetzschner (H) ensured that Norway's bombing of Libya is not being debated until after the komitébehandlingen.
Moxnes pulled in his post until the war's disastrous consequences for Libya and the region advocating that the matter should be debated openly now already.
It will be a bad start if only the politicians who supported the war comes to word in Parliament today, said Moxnes.
But it was so.
In the statement from the minister of foreign affairs stated Søreide that a decision on Norway's participation in Nato's intervention in Libya was legitimate. SV-leader Lysbakken believes one should have an open debate in advance the next time it is appropriate for Norway to participate in military operations.
- the Parliament must learn from the Libya war, then we need to change the way we take decisions to go to war. They can no longer be taken in a closed room. I am glad the minister of foreign affairs emphasises that Parliament is free to change this.
- SV will have a debate and vote in open parliament before krigsdeltakelse, as they do in Denmark. It we owe the Norwegian soldiers who are sent on dangerous missions. We will once again propose this, when Libya-the report shall be treated in Parliament, writes Lysbakken in an email to DagbladetWarned against hindsight
In the secretary of state Søreides account, it was warned to withdraw before the situation in Libya in the day when you assess whether Norway acted correctly in march 2011, when he supported the NATO operation in Libya.Stoltenberg about the choices when Norway participated in the war in Libya. Plus,
- Attempt kontrafaktiske conclusions about what had happened without a military intervention in Libya, I want to warn against. So hindsight was not a part of the Stoltenberg II government's decisions in march 2011. So it either was not for the Un security council, said foreign minister Søreide to the Parliament.Søreides four dilemmas
Søreide pulled up in his statement four dilemmas one faces when determining whether to go to the military operations or not.
Dilemma one: To act or not to act
Søreide pointed out that not doing something also can have disastrous consequences, and drew forth two examples: the Srebrenica and Rwanda.
- It is important to remember that not acting is also a choice that has consequences. The prevailing opinion in 2011 was that the world community actually had a chance to prevent serious abuses in Benghazi. In total, the Security council, and the Council adopted the mandate, said Søreide.
Dilemma two: When is the information good enough
Søreide said to the Parliament that Norway is largely based on information from the UN, Nato, enkeltallierte and other sources.
I consider it as very important – something that this government also has placed great emphasis on having an independent Norwegian review of the situation and risk factors, " said Søreide.
Question three: do Not control the war's consequences.
Søreide clarifies that the goal of the military operation in Libya was to protect civilians, not regime change in Libya.
But Petersen-the report, which came in september, believes, however, that it must have been obvious to the Norwegian authorities during the Nato operation that regime change would be a consequence of the operation.
Søreide believes it is important that you have the opportunity to change your mind along the way, and points out that the government have just done this in the conflict in Syria.
The key, in my opinion, is that one has systems that make it possible to reconsider the situation if it changes along the way. The changes we have made several times in the facility on our contribution in the anti-Isil-coalition shows that this government is aware of this, said Søreide.
Dilemma four: Norway's role within a broader international effort
Søreide think we also have learned from the Libya operation that it is important for Norway to be able to pull out.
We are in the big picture a small country, and we must always ensure that what we do is in line with the policy we wish that Norway should lead.
- It is thus important with a exitstrategi for our own efforts. We must always formulate clear goals for the military effort and set a clear framework for when we have to pull us out, " said Søreide.SOLD TO the highest bidder: CNN document here slaveauksjoner in today's Libya. Video: CNNVis more Show more