from a european perspective in Oslo
The second class I took through Danish Institute for Study Abroad was Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism from a European Perspective. One of the more important takeaways that I already discussed in the last entry was that “One’s man terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.” In regards to some of these cases that we learned about, I never thought that the supposed terrorist was considered a freedom fighter because of my subjective opinions about what they were fighting for. I know that we all have different perspectives. So in every case that we studied, someone somewhere thought that the “terrorist” was fighting for a justifiable freedom. I could attempt to go into philosophical theory right now, but that’s not my style.
In some of the class cases, I could see that the “terrorist” was motivated because of political oppression. But the best way to affect change and maintain stability is through nonviolence. I’ve read a few scholarly articles that take a qualitative approach when analyzing violent and nonviolent movements over the course of history. In those cases, the nonviolent movements were sustained for longer.
First day (Monday) - We left our apartment in the inner city of Copenhagen a little before 7 am. One of my flatmates, who was also a classmate, met another classmate who lived down the street. We walked to the train station in order to arrive at the airport by 7:30. Danish transit was very punctual. Danish airport security is some of the best in the world. Therefore, people should go to Denmark. PSA to go to Denmark, over.
Our class, professor, and TA arrived in Oslo before lunch. Afterwards, we went to the Norwegian Police University College. Cato Hemingby currently teaches at the College and has a PhD on Terrorist Target Selection. One of the case studies that he has researched is the 7/22 attack in Norway, and Anders Behring Breivik’s decision-making process that resulted in the death of 77 and injury of 260 Norwegians. His expertise is in extremism, terrorism, threat assessment, societal security, and terrorist groups in Northern Ireland and the Middle East.
In his lecture, he briefed us on Breivik’s life before the attack and internal and external motivating factors that led him in his personal target selection. Even though he didn’t show this specific article, I think it’s a good summation of what Hemingby disclosed. I recommend reading it. Breivik spent long periods of time, cut off from the world, playing World of Warcraft. He was not successful with his personal and professional exploits. As a result, he found a scapegoat for all his anger: immigrants coming to Norway. From reading the news today, and over the past year, there has been a large influx of Middle Eastern and North African immigrants trying to travel to Europe. In some European countries, there have been serious cases of Islamophobia. In others, there have been policies that have discriminated against immigrants from these aforementioned regions. When I was in Denmark, they had their 4 year parliamentary election. My RA shared with me that the new prime minister is known for stricter policies on immigrants. Yes, Denmark is beautiful. Denmark is a happy country. But there isn’t a lot of color in Denmark if we’re being honest.
Back to 2011. So Breivik thought that the Labour Party, which was the majority party in Norwegian government from 2005 to 2013 (that’s what Google told me - please speak up if I’m mistaken). Wikipedia tells me that “the party steadily increased in support until it became the largest party in Norway in 1927, a position it has held ever since.” The Labour Party is committed to social democratic ideals, which include acceptance of immigrants from developing countries. Breivik didn’t (and still doesn’t) agree with these principles. So he decided to attack the Labour Party because of what they stand for.
I’ve gotten ahead of myself. For those of you who don’t know, on July 22, 2011, a right wing Norwegian extremist, Anders Behring Breivik set a bomb in the Federal Government District in Oslo. When the bomb detonated, it killed 8 people. Once Breivik set the bomb in place, he drove to Utøya, which is an island in the Tyrifjorden lake in Hole municipality, in the county of Buskerud, Norway. This island is private and primarily used as a summer camp for the Workers Youth League (AUF), which is the youth party that is associated with the Labour Party. Breivik acted as a police officer who was sent to protect the +500 children, after news broke about the bomb explosion in Oslo. He was taken to the island via ferry and started his rampage. He killed 69 people which included some adults and children between the ages of 14 and 18.
Hemingby broke down Terrorist Target Selection Processes into 3 categories: ideology/moral and strategy; internal and external factors, and alternative targets. Hemingby contended that Breivik’s thought process for his targets came from internal thoughts and external political and social factors. Hemingby has met with Breivik before and analyzed his selection process in the 3 categories. He said he wanted something symbolic that was related directly to the Labour Party. So he thought that the government district and the youth league would carry his intended message. Hemingby said that “his no escape decision [to stay at the Youth Camp] added to the damage potential.” In regards to strategy, Hemingby assessed that Breivik went through a series of operational constraints such as: manpower (operating solo), personal skillset, weapons in possession, funding, and time (when making situational decisions when on Utøya).
Breivik called the police officers himself when he landed on the island. He said that he would cooperate peacefully and not kill anymore once they landed. The police effort to get to the island took a lot longer than expected. Hemingby estimates that the police arrived 1.5 hours after Breivik started shooting. To put things in perspective, it only took about 10 minutes to ferry over from the mainland. Even though it shouldn’t have taken that long for law enforcement to reach the island, nothing like that had ever happened in Norwegian history, so law enforcement on the mainland didn’t know how to deal with it.
After the lecture, we took a tour of the government district in Oslo. Four years later, the buildings that took the brunt of the bomb have still not changed. Hemingby was there along with a government employee who was in the building closest to the bomb and a security officer who witnessed the explosion from down the street underground. There were windows that were boarded up. I hardly saw any foot traffic. I stood under the building that the bomb was closest to. There were no walls or windows, just sturdy columns in the middle of the structure.
Second day (Tuesday) - Our class arrived in Sørbråten, which is the area that surrounds Utøya. We drove an hour north of Oslo. We were led on a tour around the island by Erlend Blakstad Haffner, who is the lead architect in the rebuilding project of Utøya and cofounder of Fantastic Norway. My professor included an excerpt from the firm’s website:
“In the wake of the terrorist attacks on Utøya 22 July 2011, Fantastic Norway has been working closely with the Labor Youth Party with designing a strategy for re‐establishing a political camp on the island of Utøya. Our ambition has been to reflect and reinforce values such as commitment, solidarity, diversity and democracy, both through form and function. In short we have done this by establishing a small village with small streets, bellfry, and a town square on the very top of the island. The village consists of many small units that together add up to a bigger community: A symbol of unity and diversity.”
Here are some thoughts I had written down on a little notepad that morning. (I had to expand on some of the thoughts now or they wouldn’t have made sense. Some of the ideas don’t have a smooth transition into the next subject. But it’s where it came up chronologically in the tour):
The entire time I kept thinking, he took this route.
They’re looking at ways to create memorials and rebuilding the island for its original function as a summer camp. They wanted the building and construction to be low key. This is similar to the mentality of the Labour Party - low key, common, not flashy, and locally/nationally resources.
The nature is beautiful. The fjord is quiet and so is the island. There are tall, slender trees around the grounds and low lying vegetation, so nowhere to hide. He had the vantage point when he came onto the small island.
We were told that Utøya is a private island. So the big question was for a while right after the attack was: should there be a national monument on the island? The answer to that is now no. There will be at least 2 private memorials on the island and the possibility of a national memorial across the water. There is an piece of land that branches from the shore that provides a unobtrusive view of the island. The architect behind the national memorial suggests that they take out a sizable piece of the land and take it to the government district in Oslo.
There are still candles and flowers in the classrooms on the spots where the children were killed. The architect discussed the concept of “staged memory” in regards to memorializing events, and whether or not to touch the classrooms in which children died. The survivors wanted to leave the building but parents didn’t want to keep it. So they’re building a new learning center right beside it. They’re keeping the same floor in the old building, just glazing over it. Haffner said that they’d be cutting the main building in half and put 69 pillars around the rim of the building. They will block off the entrance where Breivik went through to keep the focus on the children, and not his actions.
In 2015, there is a generational shift because there are new youth who weren’t at the attack joining in the summer camp. The need to teach the young about the past. They must teach what happened at the camp. But how to do it?
The kids locked themselves in the bathrooms and survived. Even though the doors were very thin and Breivik could have broken through, he did not because he did not want to walk through rooms with only one escape.
The large classroom that we walked into first had chairs lined on the outer edge and Labour Party posters on the walls still. Haffner said that the classroom is the most important.
Haffner told us that the new buildings are built where no one was shot. There are makeshift memorials like roses, small stone angels, personal photos, cigarettes, candles, and sticks that spelled victims’ names. He told us an anecdote of how they brought in architects that designed the 9/11 Memorial and Freedom Tower. The American Architects suggested putting up barriers in between the small personal memorials to deter guests from stepping too close. Haffner and other Norwegian architects said that wouldn’t be necessary because their culture would know to keep a distance and maintain social decorum.
The neighbors on the mainland want to forget about the attack. They want to move on and not remember what happened, which is understandable. But they weren’t victims, survivors, or family of the victims. They’re primarily voicing their concern over the foot traffic that will come if there is to be a national memorial. Parents can come to the island whenever they want on an individual basis. AUF creates a monthly trip to Utøya. I see a fresh rose on one marker. The rose is two weeks old at maximum. The walls, floors, and cabinets are all chipped with law enforcement getting DNA. Tables and podiums are in storage.
People from Norwegian Parliament are coming later today.
The concrete foundation pillars will be kept. The Father of the Norwegian Labour Party built the concrete pillars that serve as a foundation for the hall where some of the children died.
There will be a memory garden built as well. Haffner told us that some of the parents spearheaded the garden and will see its construction through. One victim’s father made a viewing platform.
Closer to the end of the tour, we walked around the “Lover’s Trail” that spanned the perimeter of the island. Discrete, low-lying fences create a barrier between the trail because it ran alongside the edge of the cliff at points. The small barrier was built by veterans of the Labour Party in 2012. We were told that kids hid on and clung to the sides of the cliffs on July 22. The architecture firm made the decision not to widen the trails.
How could I liken this situation to the Charleston shooting? That happened just six days before I came to the island. Hatred of mankind is a nasty thing. I can’t believe it leads us to kill one another.
The fjord is so peaceful and serene. The smell of dew is still in the air. The theme in the memorials and new buildings are tied heavily to nature. The new mess hall had light colored wood, big windows, and vaulted ceilings.
Thoughts leaving Utøya: It doesn’t seem real. It was calm and peaceful. I can’t understand the total disaster of the situation. The professor and TA even discussed the attack on the way back to Oslo. This was their first time on the island, too. This experience isn’t just a new learning experience for me.
Later that day, we met with Ragnhild Kaski, the Generalsekretær of the AUF, the Secretary General of the Workers Youth League, the youth branch of the Labour Party. Kaski was on the island when Breivik attacked. She said that she broke her leg and was saved by a Norwegian with a boat who came close to the island when the attack began. Her best friend was near death, but she survived and has since then joined the AUF board.
In the beginning of our conversation, she explained that the Labour Party had governed Norway, but they’re not right now. She said that Norwegian youth have always been involved in politics, especially on a grassroots level. Her job as the Secretary General is to get the annual national camp up and running on Utøya. She emphasized that the political youth culture in Norway is strong. She joined the AUF when she was 16.
The typical daily life of an AUF camper on Utøya is like a church camp or any other social summer camp. You have songs, sports, games, and other fun, and then a sermon, lesson, or speech. The campers then have time to discuss common interests: this case being social democracy and government.
The number of members in the AUF increased in 2011 and hasn’t decreased since. Kaski has had regular meetings with law enforcement to prepare for the camp in summer 2015. She said there was no real increase of security. The security guards that were on the island in 2011 were off duty cops that weren’t carrying guns, because that wasn’t the norm in Norway. She said that in 2015, the guards will have guns, which makes her uneasy. She expressed that when she sees an officer with a gun, she feels that something is off, some situation isn’t going to the way it’s supposed to. On the other hand and for the most part, when Americans see guns on law enforcement, we feel safe.
Her opinion of creating a memorial with the differing opinions from survivors and parents of the victims was to “find the perfect balance.” She supported the creation of a memorial. Kaski said that there was no disagreement within the party about creating a memorial, but she was butting heads with others out of the party. Over the course of four years, there have been lots of donations to fund a memorial. Kaski said that once the attack happened, national morale had grown. Norwegian citizens volunteered to construct the memorial. The national response came from the people. Kaski said Norwegians all over the country were marching peacefully while carrying many red roses in remembrance of the victims. She said the response was “as it should be.”
Kaski believes that the attack should not be forgotten. She was adamant about calling it a political and terrorist attack, rather than some kind of hate crime, because that’s what it was. Breivik created fear and terror against a political party with opposing views.
She briefed us on the Breivik’s current state. He is serving 21 years in prison. All of you reading this will think that’s crazy. If you’re from Texas, you’re really surprised he wasn’t sentenced to death. I learned that this is the longest prison sentence any Norwegian inmate has ever received. At the end of his 21 years, his case will be reviewed again. Kaski, and almost every Norwegian, said that he will never leave prison because of the severity of the attack. After 4 years since the attack, he still wants to continue his fascist party. He continues to write his personal manifesto in jail. Recently, he applied to study Political Science online at Oslo University and has been accepted. He continues to send op-ed pieces to the newspapers. Kaski said that she was happy that Breivik still has his human rights, including a right to an education.
The Norwegian Criminal Justice System is different than its American counterpart. When we heard that Breivik was seeking higher education, one of my classmates audibly said “That’s nuts.” Kaski laughed and said “We think the same way about some American things.” Norway seeks to rehabilitate criminals and take a “restorative justice” approach. Obviously this approach is different than the American criminal justice system.
A big question that kept coming up in the discussion with Kaski was “would Norway have responded differently if Breivik wasn’t Norwegian?” That’s just some food for thought since I don’t know the answer.
Another thing that I learned was that my professor stayed true to the “European Perspective” aspect of the class. I really did appreciate looking at different European terrorist events with the help of various European resources. We heard from Norwegian scholars and survivors. 7/22 is said to be the worst terrorist attack on Norwegian soil.
After taking a lot of time to write this entry, I want to remind everyone that we can’t expect the unexpected. Yes, we can implement counter-terrorism measures and policies to combat terrorism, but people can only do so much. Remember to hold your loved ones closer and tighter.
annaxmalina
dededos
2087
izzy806
theartofmadeline
vaporwave