Moral Readiness – Do We Speak too Little About it?

Readiness is about more than simply the emergency services and the other key homeland-security institutions. It is about all of us and our shared values, what Jens Stoltenberg in the days after 22 July 2011 spoke of as the need for more democracy, openness and humanity. Photo: Sjur Stølen

Five years have passed since the shocking events of 22 July 2011. We still notice how these events have taken hold of us. We notice it all the more when similar terrorist attacks take place elsewhere in the world: in Istanbul, Dallas or Nice. We shed tears in sympathy with the victims. And of course we fear for our own safety.

One of the most important debates that follows in the wake of terrorism is the debate about readiness and security. The newspaper Dagbladet deserves credit for its active coverage of Norway’s state of readiness. What have we learnt? What has been done? What has not been done? Are we capable of protecting our own population?

These questions are both important and timely, and much of the debate has been of high quality. But readiness is not only about the emergency services and other key homeland-security institutions. Read More

A Sense of Community in Times of Terrorism

“I am now even more convinced than I was five years ago that a sense of community has to be part of the solution to counter terrorism”. Photo: Jørgen Carling, PRIO

In contrast to the impression one may derive from “the debate about the debate” in Norway, “we” – the overwhelming majority – can agree on many points, including the fact that we stand united in the struggle against extremism. We succeeded in doing so in the “rose marches” five years ago, and we can continue to do so now that the roses commemorating 22 July, 2011 have long since withered.

In the wake of the terrorist attacks of 22 July, I wrote about “fragmentation in times of terrorism” [in Norwegian]. My message was that stigmatization and enemy images create and reinforce fragmentation. Like many others in Norway at that time, I called for people to stand united, and to remain united after the roses had withered.

The roses of 22 July have withered. Since then we have unfortunately seen several – albeit smaller – seas of flowers in the streets of Oslo: outside the embassies of France, Belgium and the United States. These tributes have symbolized grief and solidarity with those affected. These roses have also withered. Sadly it will not be long, however, before more flowers take their place.

Read More

Negotiating Collective Identities

Original in Einar Økland’s private collection, digital reproduction by Bergen Public Library

The 22 July attacks, now five years ago, bore horrific testimony to what an ideology of exclusion and hatred, at the hands of one man, can do. Whilst the terror was of such a scope that the moment called for a unified response, ideological cleavages along the Eurabia, anti-Islam, and anti-immigration lines soon re-emerged in public debate and on social media.

Meanwhile, the conundrum of how collective identities and shared understandings of who ‘we’ are as a democratic society, post-22 July, remains. The reality of our multicultural, diverse society is lived on an everyday basis, though unequally distributed, across the country and within cities like Oslo.

The resilience of shared collective identities, reflected in the post-22 July ‘rose marches’, remains within Norwegian society. The immediate unity, as a response to the 22 July, was arguably in its widest articulations a fragile unity, one based around an understanding that what we share, at least, is that we do not condone the terrorist’s actions, and we want to change our society through democratic means, and not violent ones. That was reflected in the focus on openness, on democracy.

Read More

Receding into the Background?

Keeping alive the memories of 22 July and its aftermath remains as important as ever. Photo: Paal Sørensen

As 22 July 2011 becomes a more distant memory, we are overwhelmed with massacres and terrorist attacks in other parts of the world, including fierce attacks in Turkey, France, and the United States. At the time of writing, the terrorist attack in Nice, France, is the most recent. Many of these attacks seem to be masterminded by the terrorist group ISIS, reflecting an extreme Islamist ideology and a wish to spread fear and terror in as many communities as possible.

What does this do to our memory of 22 July?

Read More

France’s Response to Terror

Following the terror attack in Nice, the French President Hollande has responded to mounting criticism by sharpening both his rhetoric and the country’s proposed reactions to terror. But no society can be protected against all risks, and anti-terror efforts do not always have the intended effects.

Photo: Benjamin Boccas, via Flickr

Within a split second, in the afternoon of 14 July, the beach promenade in Nice turned into a scene of terror . The weapon was an ordinary truck. The perpetrator was a petty criminal, a Tunisian citizen, with no known extremist propensities. It is not yet clear whether he carried out the attack alone, or if he had any accomplices. At least 84 people have lost their lives, and many are seriously injured. The Islamic State (IS) – or Daesh, as it is commonly referred to in France – has taken credit .

The immediate question that springs to mind is how a state can best protect its citizens, given that a single person with an ordinary truck can cause such enormous damage. Yet, different questions seem to dominate the French public debate in the immediate aftermath of the attack: How could this happen? Why were the security services not able to prevent this? How was it possible for the perpetrator to drive for two kilometers, through the crowd, before being shot?

Read More

This Week in South Sudan – Week 28

Tuesday 12 July The humanitarian situation in Juba is dire and continues to deteriorate. Hospitals have been shelled and food supplies are low. Tens of thousands of people have taken refuge in churches, and many more have been displaced. Russia said it is willing to consider imposing an arms embargo on South Sudan and that… Read more »

Framing the UCLA Shooting Event

UCLA_hoodieWednesday June 1st was my last day of Spring Quarter teaching at UCLA. At 9:50am, a BruinAlert trickled into my inbox announcing “Police Activity at Engineering Building 4. Avoid area until further notice” and a few minutes later “Shooting at Engineering 4. Go to secure location and deny entry (lockdown) now!” I did not notice, as I was busy preparing for my review lecture at 11:30am; I also did not see the flood of e-mails from students starting at 10am saying: “I just heard there’s a shooter loose on campus and I’m staying home”. At 10:15am, NBC interrupted its regular programming to announce that a shooting event was reported in progress at UCLA; the news helicopter was already on the way.

Read More

Blair’s Global Vision – and Lacking Knowledge Base

Tony Blair took the decision to take part in the military intervention in Iraq in 2003 more or less on his own, and based it on very scant knowledge. Are there reasons to fear the same happening again?

Tony Blair and George W. Bush in 2003.

The British Chilcot Commission has released a crushing verdict over former PM Tony Blair’s decision to stand side by side with the US in Iraq in 2003. How was it possible for such an important decision to be taken without serious consideration of its long-term consequences?

Read More

This Week in South Sudan – Week 27

Monday 4 July According to state officials, the local government in the proposed Gbudwe State in Western Equatoria State, is reportedly training over 800 youth from various armed groups. Wednesday 6 July Authorities in Jonglei state said that thousands of people have fled their homes after a land dispute escalated into violent clashes. A government investigation… Read more »

A Post-Brexit We?

London park. Photo: Daniel Enchev, via Flickr

Who is the ‘we’ in the context of the Brexit vote?

Whilst the protection of British borders was a key ingredient in Brexit debates, the answer to what kind of a community we are talking about within those borders, remains in desperate need of addressing. Lingering notions of cultural purity cannot stand unchallenged.

Which community, which sense of ‘we’, was the subject of the battle in Brexit? Brexit was won on immigration, or more accurately on ‘the topic of immigration’. Arguably, it was won on the basis of a particular conception of ‘us’ set up against a variety of ‘thems’, as an external defining agent, rather than on an internally driven grounded sense of a ‘we’. The Brexit ‘thems’ notably included EU immigrants. For Brits, as people across Europe, have radically different perceptions of the scales of immigration and cultural diversity, than what actual numbers tell.

Read More