The Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs has warned allies must be consistent in applying international law.
In an interview with Roar, Espen Barth Eide also called on allies to end the sale of weapons to Israel used in the occupation of Palestine.
Speaking at King’s on Monday, Eide highlighted the importance of holding allies accountable for breaching international law. He argued that consistency is essential to preserving the rules-based international order in a turbulent world.
In an event part of a Conflict, Security and Development Speaker Series hosted by the Department of War Studies, the Minister focused on the role of European powers and international law in ongoing conflicts.
While Eide acknowledged there are many conflicts that deserve more attention around the world, he argued that the wars in Gaza and Ukraine are pivotal to perceptions of international law: “If we speak up against violations going on in one conflict but not the other, the net effect is that nobody believes in anything.”
He went on to praise the role of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The two courts have been active during the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. The ICC have issued arrest warrants on both Vladimir Putin, Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as Hamas commander Mohammed Deif.
Eide warned that allied countries must be consistent in their applications of the courts’ rulings, telling the audience: “I get worried when I see some of my near allies who are very enthusiastic about the ICJ and ICC rulings on Russia, but much more careful when the same rules are applied against, for instance, Israel.”
He argued that, to demonstrate that the international order is truly rules-based, countries must show the courage to criticise their allies:
“If our adversaries violate the rules, we should speak up. But that does not come at a very high cost. I can criticise Russia on any given day. I will criticise them again, and I should. But it is when my traditional friends violate the rules, that’s when it really matters.”
Arms Exports
Having played a central role as the mediator of the Oslo accords in 1993, Norway has since gone further than most of its European allies in support of Palestine, recognising Palestinian statehood as well as voicing support for a two-state solution.
In November, Norway was the only western country to sign an open letter to the UN Secretary General urging other states not to export arms to Israel that might be used on occupied Palestinian land:
Eide told Roar: “That letter is a reference to an ICJ ruling that states that the Israeli occupation is illegal and that other countries therefore should not contribute to it. One of the ways that you contribute to the occupation is by selling weapons, and that needs to stop.”
In the UK, the Labour Government has suspended 30 out of 350 arms export licences to Israel, a decision criticised by Amnesty International for being “too limited and riddled with loopholes”. The Norwegian Minister emphasised that the matter does not weaken the Norway-UK relationship, but highlighted the importance of speaking up for his government’s views on the issue.
The War in Ukraine
Eide argued that the Ukrainian war effort is about more than the country’s freedom. He emphasised that victory is crucial to defending the international rules-based order: “If we don’t defend the rules against invasion and occupation, that would lead to a world where that becomes more common again.”
Two weeks ago, the UK, alongside the US, gave permission for Ukrainian attacks on Russian territory using British and American long-distance missiles. Eide said that Norway, as well as the UK, had been encouraging this change in policy, but the US had been more reluctant.
The BBC reported that fear of escalation was seen to be the cause for the initial caution. Eide regards the decision as “the right call”, arguing that: “International law states that Ukraine’s right to defend itself is not limited to their own territory, but includes attacks on the aggressor’s territory.”
Following the permission for long-range missile use, Russia altered its nuclear doctrine, lowering the bar for when and whom they can attack with nuclear weapons. Eide rejected Russian claims of aggression, arguing that NATO has the principles of international law on their side:
“Putin is arguing that NATO now is directly involved in the war. I do not share that view. We have already sided with Ukraine, based on our perception that Ukraine is under attack and deserves to receive weapons. There is no fundamental change in that Ukraine now is able to perform attacks on Russian soil. It is militarily, tactically and operationally important, but we [NATO] are not more involved as a result. We’re not a part of the conflict merely because we provide weapons. You are only a part of the conflict once you actively participate in the fighting.”
The policy of supplying weapons for direct attacks on Russian territory does however mark a historic shift, as NATO-member states have never done so against a nuclear power. On whether NATO now is moving away from the norm of nuclear deterrence, Eide said:
“There is a line between supporting Ukraine with weapons and being a participant in the conflict. That is a line I think most of us do not want to exceed. When Putin says that NATO is involved, he does so to frighten western countries from contributing with weapons. It is a rhetorical argument. I believe we can firmly rely on the principles, and they state that Putin is not right in his assessment.”
After speaking to Roar, Eide headed to Brussels to attend a meeting of NATO Ministers of Foreign Affairs. The agenda for the meeting, he said, was to discuss how allied forces should prepare for a new US administration, as well as the steps NATO could take to support Ukraine in the interim period.
I'm a journalist interested in stories on politics and economy, especially on the international scene. Feel free to email me about a potential story.
