By Edward Lucas
Ten years ago, the geopolitical thriller series Okkupert hit Norwegian television screens with a bang. The acting was sizzling, the characters sympathetic, the plot gripping. Norway had come under Russian occupation: the population must choose between resistance (suicidal), collaboration (shameful), or denial (doomed).
The only flaw was the scenario’s plausibility. Surely the Kremlin would not dare to occupy a NATO country? Surely European allies would show solidarity? And the United States would hardly stand by and let the Kremlin munch its way into northern Europe.
These days, the plot no longer looks quite so fanciful. Countries that once saw the United States as the lodestar and lynchpin of their security are taking another look. Decision-makers in Copenhagen are reeling after their prime minister’s combative phone call with President Donald Trump over the future of Greenland, an autonomous part of the Kingdom of Denmark.
Here in Oslo, where I am writing this column, the Greenland issue is causing ructions too. If the US claims Greenland on grounds of naked strategic necessity, where does that leave Svalbard, an icy archipelago of huge interest to Russia? Other close allies such as Taiwan and Canada are reeling from the Trump administration’s hard-nosed approach to tariffs. And all that in less than a month.
American inconstancy is just one problem. Then there is European greed. Some European countries (or at least some German and Hungarian officials) are already hoping that a ceasefire deal in Ukraine, however messy, would allow them to start importing Russian pipeline gas again. That is not a million miles away from the central premise of Okkupert, in which EU countries decide to sacrifice Norway’s sovereignty to keep oil and gas flowing.
But at least the fictional EU shows decisiveness. The real thing is in an even bigger mess, with France and Germany both in political paralysis. If we are lucky, Berlin may host a functioning government again by May. Europe’s enemies work to a crisper tempo.
While presidential elections loom in Poland the government in Warsaw is unable or unwilling to take even the slightest political risks. Romania and the Czech Republic seem to be heading over the cliff (with a helping shove from Moscow); Slovakia, Hungary and Austria have toppled already.
The final element in the fictional drama is Norway’s own inability to defend itself. The Russian occupation does not start with full-scale invasion, but with unconventional warfare: economic coercion and the brief kidnapping of the prime minister, prompting fatal political deceit and secret concessions.
That rings true too. While Western countries still pretend a quiet life is possible, seen from Russia, the war has already started. Ukraine may not be formally a member of Nato, but it is a Nato proxy, and defeat there will mark the end of the alliance’s credibility. That may not be true. But Russia believes it, which is what matters.
All these troubling signs are just tremors before the earthquake. It is all too easy to imagine President Trump ordering the full or partial withdrawal of the rotational forces in Poland (which also defend the Baltic states). Amid further military setbacks in Ukraine, he could launch “peace” talks held directly between Washington and Moscow, without any European involvement: humiliating and divisive.
It is easy to see how the Kremlin might exploit that with a quick land-grab or other provocation somewhere in the Baltic region. True, some of the countries there would fight. But would their most important American-made high-tech deterrent weapons, like Finland’s long-range JASSM missiles, work properly in a war that the United States disapproved of?
Fanciful? That’s what they said about Okkupert.
Edward Lucas is a Non-resident Senior Fellow and Senior Advisor at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA).
