Wonderful and reliable description of the facts around the first and most Act of War against Europe since WWII and before... The economic repercussions against our Continent are enormous as against the policies we, as european citizens, have appreciated and shared regarding the strategic relationships with Russia and Eurasia.

It clearly and strongly shows the level of Nazism that lives inside USA Governments, Agencies and many of american citizen that support them.

Thanks a lot, I posted today the italian translation of your great article that deserve more diffusion.


Expand full comment

"It clearly and strongly shows the level of Nazism that lives inside USA "

This is not at all about Nazism. It is about oligarchy and plutocracy.

- DO read - e.g. - Otto Strasser's story of how the anti-racist, anti-finance section of the party - was rooted out by Hitler. http://mailstar.net/otto-strasser-flight.html

Expand full comment

Interesting. Thanks.

I'll read more about it, but Nazism is what we know in EU as the most authoritarian and violent type of government and related policies (even excluding completely antisemitism).

So using Nazism in USA is the most clear and fast word to communicate that picture.

Try to use plutocracy or oligarchy, you'll not come out with the same message to every people. BTW in the last year Europeans and Americans have been hearing "oligarchy" much more about Russia than USA, so... your risk is to mislead the message.

Expand full comment

So, use the word 'plutocracy'. - Nazism and Fascism were both clearly against oligarchy and plutocracy.

Expand full comment

Hei Ola,

thanks for this piece--incredibly dense and informative.

Here's my question for you: while I 'buy' the arguments you write about Norway and its (deep state) movers, my sense is this--since you also mention the Swedish navy's activities and all but imply their participation, what are the odds that the U.S. had brought in the Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, and Poles (as well as possibly some German deep state actors, but quite likely not Scholz) without putting them in touch with each other?

In other words: do you think it feasible/plausible that the Norwegians, Danes, Swedes, and Poles would all be approached independently of each other with the U.S. promising whatever to each of them?

Expand full comment


Some Norwegians were supposedly in the know, and they had apparently also briefed a couple of Danes and Swedes. I believe that the British were onboard already at an early stage. However, what confuses me is why the Americans had chosen to take out the pipelines the day before the inauguration of the Norwegian-Polish pipeline. If we assume that the US intention wasn't just to offend the Norwegians and to create a real trouble for the Norwegians, one has to look at who else, if not the Americans, could have proposed it, and it is obvious that some people in the Polish leadership could have thought that this was a good idea. This is possibly an indication that some Poles also were in the know.

Expand full comment

Hei Ola,

thanks for responding--here's what I've written about Hersh's non-reception:


Now, if I'd be 'in the know' in the US, I'd like to make things as confusing as possible by muddying the waters as much as possible--and I'd do that by telling a select number of people from every (deep state) in Denmark, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Poland that they're in on this super-secret, super-special operation, but that, if they'd like to benefit (personally as well as institutionally), they'd never admit to this.

I'm gravitating towards the notion that (some of them) all were 'in the know': there's simply no way that these shenanigans would be conducted in the Baltic Sea while BALTOPS 22 is ongoing without anyone noticing something fishy.

As regards the US snubbing Norway just a day before the inauguration of the pipeline, well, I think it might be the US telling Norway that they're 'nothing special' (but I do think that PM Støre might not have known all there was to know…).

Expand full comment

I think Støre should be asked why he cancelled the trip. Do you know if anyone has done that?

(I tried it myself but so far got no reply.)

Expand full comment

Hello again,

After a couple of reminders I actually received an e-mail answer, saying he cancelled his trip to work on the government budget:

"Kjære Tobias Ljungvall

Jeg viser til din henvendelse om statsministerens besøk til Polen.

På grunn av arbeid med statsbudsjettet reiste olje- og energiminister Terje Aasland til Polen i stedet for statsministeren til åpningen av Baltic Pipe i fjor.

Med vennlig hilsen


Google tells me the Norwegian government presented the budget October 6. I suppose one can believe this explanation or not.

Expand full comment

I just had a closer look at the content of the press morning press conference September 28, that you mention:


It's about the budget, which perhaps lends some credibility to the above explanation?

Expand full comment

But, on the other hand, that press conference was apparently announced only on the 27:th, the day before - when the prime minister would have been in Poland - so perhaps he had just gotten busy with these budget issues as a way to avoid the trip. (Sorry for spamming your comment section like this.)

Expand full comment

Ola Tunander, there are seven words in quotation marks in your text. You wrote this: Sy Hersh says that some people “in Denmark and Sweden were also briefed”. I cannot find the seven words “in Denmark and Sweden were also briefed” in any text written by Seymour Hersh. Where do they come from? I apologise if I have overlooked something that SH has written or said.

Expand full comment

That the NYT failed to mention the existence of the Hersh article even to discredit it was the biggest red flag for me. Such blatant textbook VOA-style ‘reporting’ should be an embarrassment, but somehow isn’t in this case?

Expand full comment