Secrets That Could Bring Down Jens Stoltenberg
By Rune Østgård – Document, Norway-28 February 2025
SECRETS: The author Rune Østgård believes there are many skeletons in the closet that could contribute to bringing down Jens Stoltenberg, despite the immediate euphoria following his comeback.
Secrets That Could Bring Down Stoltenberg
In this article, I pour cold water on those who have given gold, incense, and myrrh to Jens Stoltenberg because he descended from heavenly halls abroad and returned to his motherland to promise us eternal wealth and hope for salvation from Trumno
Stoltenberg’s comeback in Norwegian politics comes in the same year that he is set to publish his book On My Watch. The book covers the period when he led NATO. The publisher’s marketing is in full swing, and time will tell whether the timing was right.
Rune Østgård (b. 1972) is the author of the books Arrow of Truth, UNBAR, and the bestseller Fraudcoin – 1000 Years of Inflation as Politics. You can follow him on X. The initial reactions: the mainstream media rejoiced when it became known in February this year that Jens Stoltenberg was to be Støre’s new Finance Minister.
Labour Party support soared—from a catastrophic 14% in the worst opinion poll in December to a full 30% at the peak in February. The commentary dubbed it the “Stoltenberg effect.”
Several societal commentators who have been critical of the way the country has been governed recently praised the news.
Martin Bech Holte, author of the bestseller The Country That Became Too Rich, was one of them. In an interview with E24, he stated that it was “extremely inspiring” that Stoltenberg had returned to Norwegian politics, calling it “a gift to the country” to have someone of his caliber as Finance Minister.
iNyheter’s Ole Asbjørn Ness, who also hosts the popular podcast Ness, tweeted on X: “Finally, an adult in the government. That Jens Stoltenberg becomes Finance Minister is a joy. A truly great joy.” I suspect that Bech Holte and Ness missed some important perspectives when they made these comments—and that they will change their minds over time.
A Marked Man
I believe that the jubilation will subside and that the Labour Party risks losing the parliamentary election, partly because of Stoltenberg’s comeback. The reason is that there is no other current Norwegian politician who can be more closely associated with the following negative issues for the Labour Party:
The power cable scandal and the electricity crisis: It was the economist Stoltenberg who was Prime Minister when the Labour government in 2012 committed Norway to laying power cables to Great Britain and Germany—a decision he helped make based on trust in Statnett’s estimate that electricity prices would only rise by 1 to 3 øre.
The ceding of sovereignty: This followed the “sneak-in of the EU” via the EEA agreement, under the pretext of gaining access to the EU’s internal market—something Switzerland achieved through bilateral agreements without giving up sovereignty.
NATO’s two most humiliating defeats ever: The proxy war against Russia in Ukraine—in which Stoltenberg played a key role as NATO Secretary General—and Trump’s ongoing wing-clipping of the organization in the wake of its numerous losses under the Norwegian’s leadership.
The vanishing power base: Add to this the fact that the very foundation of Stoltenberg’s power—his 40-year-long, extensive engagement with NATO—is now eroding because Trump is marginalizing the organization and reversing the close political cooperation with Europe.
This is part of a geopolitical revolution led by the American president, who is now moving to cooperate with Russia on disarmament, peace, and trade. This shift negatively affects an already crisis-stricken EU, as well as Stoltenberg and many other European political leaders who have derived their power from the former American empire.
During the campaign to become leader of AUF (the Workers’ Youth League, the youth organization of the Labour Party) in 1985, Stoltenberg was a clear critic of Norwegian NATO membership. After being elected, he reversed his stance and gradually worked to get AUF to support membership—a change he ultimately achieved at the national conference in 1989.
The timing was peculiar. NATO was founded in 1949 primarily to keep the Soviet Union out of Europe—but also to keep the USA in Europe and to keep Germany in check. When AUF reversed its stance on NATO in 1989, the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc were singing their swan song.
Gorbachev’s perestroika and the easing of tensions with the West contributed significantly to the Soviet Union no longer appearing as a major threat. This could have had consequences for NATO, which might then have had to take on new tasks.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this change gradually became apparent. We moved from a bipolar geopolitical structure to one where the USA gained hegemonic power. As a result, NATO’s involvement increased, with member states being drawn into a series of American-led operations that had tragic consequences in places such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria.
Stoltenberg played a prominent role in this development, both as Prime Minister when Norway contributed significantly to the bombing of Libya in 2011—an operation in which other NATO members were understandably lukewarm—and during his 10-year tenure as NATO Secretary General from 2014 to 2024.
By the end of his term, he had overseen the accession of four new member states, in addition to six others that had joined between the fall of the Soviet Union and his taking on the NATO role.
Stoltenberg will be associated with NATO’s expansion towards Russia’s borders, which eventually led to Putin declaring “enough is enough,” Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, NATO’s shabby defeat in the proxy war in 2025, and Trump’s subsequent clipping of the organization’s wings.
A Parallel with Zelensky
The changes in Stoltenberg during the 1980s are reminiscent of how Volodymyr Zelensky shifted from a cautious stance on NATO during the 2019 election campaign to becoming an outspoken advocate for membership after he became Ukraine’s new president that same year. Let’s take a look at what Zelensky was subjected to.
Shortly after becoming president, he was pressured by a group of 70 NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations—that is, non-state, so-called voluntary organizations) that received financial support from the American agency USAID. On the website of the Ukraine Crisis Media Center, these NGOs published a joint statement titled
“Joint Statement by Civil Society Representatives on the First Political Steps of the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky.”
The statement, clearly aimed at the president, set out “red lines that must not be crossed” and included, among other demands, the following:
No reconciliation with Russia,
No referendum on peace talks with Russia,
No slowing down of Ukraine’s integration into NATO and the EU.
The NGOs warned that if Zelensky did not comply with the demands, measures would be taken that would inevitably destabilize Ukraine:
“Should the President cross these red lines, such actions will inevitably lead to political instability in our country and the deterioration of international relations.”
Several commentators have interpreted this as a threat that tied Zelensky’s hands and feet, effectively placing him under Western control.
One such commentator is Mike Benz, a world-leading expert on modern censorship and propaganda, who has discussed the matter in two episodes on Joe Rogan and written about it in detail on X.
Zelensky’s subsequent actions clearly show that he capitulated to these demands. He shifted from being open to peace with Russia to adopting a hardline stance, ensuring that NATO membership became a constitutional goal as early as 2019.
This history fits into a familiar pattern. USAID has financed similar initiatives by NGOs during the color revolutions in Georgia in 2003, Kyrgyzstan in 2004, and Ukraine in 2014.
The Folder on the AUF Leader’s Desk
As we shall see, Stoltenberg may also have been pressured in his time to change his view on NATO membership. To shed light on this, we must go back a full 60 years to a case that Dagbladet wrote about in 2016. NATO was a major political issue in Norway in the 1960s, especially within AUF.
When the political talent Ola Teigen was elected leader in 1965, the organization supported Norwegian NATO membership. A major scandal would abruptly change this stance.In 1968, unidentified perpetrators stole a letter from Teigen’s desk. The letter contained information about large payments from the CIA to the International Union of Socialist Youth, of which AUF was a member. Dagbladet reported the matter a few days later, and the scandal was confirmed.
Teigen resigned in 1969. AUF set up a fact-finding commission that produced a report on the matter. The report was marked “Strictly Confidential.” Its contents are not publicly known.
After the scandal, AUF changed its stance on NATO and advocated for Norway’s withdrawal from the alliance. In 1970, Teigen was found dead in Trondheim, with his death reported as a suicide.
When Stoltenberg joined the Labour Party in 1973 at the age of 14, he established a local branch of AUF. In 1983, he was elected national deputy leader. At that time, under the leadership of Egil Ulateig, AUF was still opposed to Norwegian NATO membership.
In 1985, as mentioned earlier, Stoltenberg ran for leader.
Aftenposten interviewed him the day before he took office. The journalist remarked, “You are by no means a pronounced NATO supporter,” to which Stoltenberg replied:
“No, that’s correct. AUF’s goal is to dismantle the blocs and to have Norway withdraw from the alliance.”
Shortly thereafter, he began contributing to a change in AUF’s stance on NATO. Stoltenberg remained leader until Turid Birkeland took over in 1989. Trond Giske then became leader in 1992, followed by Anniken Huitfeldt in 1996. In 2014, Dagsavisen printed an op-ed by Huitfeldt titled “Where International Networks Are Created.” She wrote:
“When I was elected AUF leader in 1996, there was a single document on the desk when I entered my new, small office; the sacred document containing the fact-finding committee’s report following former AUF leader Ola Teigen’s suicide in the late 1960s.”
The same occurred when Trond Giske took over as leader. When and by whom the practice of placing the “sacred report” on the new leader’s desk was established is not generally known.
It is conceivable that whoever started this practice intended it as a warning to the AUF leader that doing anything to jeopardize Norwegian NATO membership—such as when Teigen allowed sensitive information about the youth organization being financed by the CIA to emerge—could have severe negative consequences for both the individual and AUF.
This matter raises two important questions:
Was the sacred report also presented on Stoltenberg’s desk on the very first day he became AUF leader?
Was the content of the report of such a nature that it could represent undue influence on his—and later AUF leaders’—stance on NATO membership?
In my view, the issue casts a shadow over Stoltenberg’s political career, especially given his close ties to the former hegemonic USA.
Conclusion
In summary, Stoltenberg is associated with:
Incompetence (the electricity crisis),
Ceding sovereignty (EEA), and
Painful losses for NATO (the Ukraine war and the wing-clipping after the organization became too ambitious under the Norwegian’s leadership).
As you can see, things may also have happened during his tenure that perhaps do not withstand debate or the thorough investigative journalism we can expect in the wake of Trump’s foreign policy revolution. In addition, as I see it, Stoltenberg’s power base is clearly weakened.
I therefore believe that Stoltenberg’s return to Norwegian politics will have a negative impact on the Labour Party in the parliamentary election.
Uncensored News. Subscribe to Free and Independent Document.
Buy Hans Rustad’s Book on Trump Here!
You can purchase the e-book here.
We at Document want to facilitate an interesting and respectful debate on our issues.
Please read our guidelines for debate conduct before you participate.
Read more from document.no (in Norwegian):
Jens and Hillary – 30 April 2024
Steklov’s Meeting with the Past – 14 January 2022
Stoltenberg and All the Elephants in the Room – 7 January 2023
Zelensky Arrests Dissidents, Creates Lists of “State Enemies” – 14 June 2024
Are We Back in 1938, or Are Voters in Europe Beginning to Wake Up? – 14 June 2024
Mitrokhin Revelations – A Political Earthquake – 25 December 2015
The War in Ukraine: The News Stream – 28 February 2022
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization – A Saga Exposed – 19 February 2022
One Year with Trump as President – Have the Experts’ Analyses Held Water? – 27 January 2018
European Financing of Terrorism is Extensive – 7 November 2020
Support Us Contact/Tip Us About Us Document
