An attack on Norway

That increased globalization has made it easier for political activists to operate across national borders is a well-known fact. More unknown, however, is the ability of authoritarian states to suppress dissidents outside their borders.

Dagbladet’s recent reveal about The Saudi artist who is said to have been threatened with silence in Norway is just one example of a worrying and growing international trend in which authoritarian states are bragging about the sovereignty of other states.

– Saudi Arabia scares an artist in Bergen.

Saudi Arabia joins the ranks of countries that, with a small degree of restraint, use tithe funds against compatriots outside their own territory. The murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in 2018 is perhaps the most brutal example of this.

Furthermore, it is not unknown that Russia On several occasions, critics of the regime have been silenced for the use of, among other things, chemical weapons. In 2006, former KGB officer and key opposition activist Alexander Litvinenko was poisoned in a London hotel. More recently, in 2018, former double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter were subjected to a similar attack in Salisbury in England, it is reasonable to assume that Russia was behind this.

China has also been accused of launching a comprehensive global campaign aimed at curbing Chinese voices that criticize the communist regime. This has involved, among other things, the kidnapping and forcible return of dissidents residing in other parts of the world.

Threatened by cyberbullying

Oppression that crosses borders It is not a new phenomenon, but something that until recently has been partially overlooked in the literature on authoritarian regimes. This transnational use of repressive measures is often closely related to various forms of activism among migrants. Political participation directed at native countries among various immigrant communities in Western countries is not entirely uncommon.

On the contrary, this is very common and, for example, we have seen such activity among Somalis and other groups in Norway. In some cases, this political engagement is specifically aimed at authoritarian regimes and often with the aim of major political upheaval. In light of the Arab Spring in 2011, we have learned much about how such activity is viewed and handled by authoritarian leaders who have used extensive networks of supporters and public servants in embassies and consulates to suppress such activity.

The Tunisian, Libyan and Syrian authorities have carried out the pioneer call for refugees for many years and in many cases have used violence to silence activists.

– Call the ambassador on the carpet.

My own research focuses on the spotlight against political activism among Syrians in Europe and North America. The personal interviews provide a grim glimpse into a daily life marked by ongoing fear at the reach of the Syrian regime. The increase in demonstrations in Syria in 2011 was reflected in similar actions among Syrian immigrant communities in other parts of the world, including our neighboring country Sweden.

These actions targeted Syrian embassies and consulates and were often met with a massive countermobilization of the Syrian security apparatus. Several activists I have been in contact with have pointed out how informants from the regime hid among the protesters to document participation and identify people with the aim of pressuring them to shut up later.

Dialing from hidden numbers with specific threats if retaliation has been a recurring and worrying phenomenon and, in many cases, these threats have been directed at family and friends who are still in their country of origin. The feeling of being constantly monitored and that political activity in democratic states can lead to unreserved violence against close ones in the country of origin, often makes it very difficult for many to express themselves about politics in the country originally.

The nervousness has at times been palpable in the discussions I have had with Syrians about Syrian policy in the public sphere in Norway.

It is quite serious for foreign states to exercise power in the territory of other states. In principle, such activity challenges the monopoly of violence and the sovereignty of another state, fundamental rules of the game in the international community. However, these are issues that present great challenges.

A dangerous espionage and influence

They are often difficult to detect, document and prosecute, and therefore it is also difficult to defend yourself. In the Syrian context, I only know of one example from the United States where an informant was sentenced to 18 months in prison for operating on behalf of the Syrian regime and gathered information on dissidents for the purpose of repression. The fact that there are few specific charges, trials, and convictions doesn’t reflect the scope, but it does say something about how complicated it is.

However, it is not just about prosecuting individual informants who work in secret. It is also about political decisions. The BT leader requests that the matter be taken to the highest level in Norwegian politics and that the government clearly protests Saudi Arabia’s activity on Norwegian soil. That is something I totally agree with.

State-sponsored espionage, repression, and violence against dissidents in Norway is not just an attack on them, but an attack on the sovereignty and integrity of Norway. It is an attack on our democracy when other states intervene and restrict freedom of expression in Norway. It cannot go unnoticed and require a clear response, whether through diplomatic, economic or legal channels.