16 years ago, Norwegian soldiers arrested a man in a valley in Afghanistan. The aim was to arrest a known and wanted Taliban leader. The man who was arrested was a local mason, VG has previously mentioned.
In the following years, Chief of Defense Eirik Kristoffersen has said and written that they arrested a key Taliban leader. He still believes today that they arrested a Taliban leader, but confirms that the name they reported in after the operation was the same as the bricklayer’s.
Defense Minister Bjørn Arild Gram (Sp) has refused four times in the past year to answer the Storting on more details about the operation.
Among other things, the minister did not want to say which name of the prisoner the Norwegian special forces – led by Kristoffersen – reported to the headquarters in Norway.
The minister did not inform
The Minister has indicated that the report and the messages after the operation are gradedInformation classified as secret or confidential for national security or other sensitive reasons. A distinction is made between different degrees of protection or security. and that the information must therefore be kept secret.
In February, Gram said that he could not answer VG’s questions because the information was soon exempted from the public domain – and as recently as March, the Ministry of Defense said that they could not answer questions about the case without going into classified information.
But central parts of the information have been downgraded since November last year – without Gram and the Ministry of Defense finding out about it.
the defense graduatedWhen information that was previously secret or confidential is made less secret so that more people can access it. information about the case on 13 and 14 November last year. Two days later, the Storting received a response from Gram to a written questionThe government must respond to the Storting within six days. Ministers are responsible for their ministry and agencies under them. The information must be correct. where he repeated that he could not provide information from classified reports.
The Ministry of Defense first found out about the downgrading on 5 April this year.
See the full timeline
3 November: Questions from the StortingSV’s Ingrid Fiskaa asks for the fourth time for answers to details from the operation in a written question from the Storting.
The communications unit in the Defense Staff asked the Defense’s special forces to assess whether information about the operation could be downgraded, according to spokesman Andreas Lander in the Defense.
The Ministry of Defence’s response to Fiskaa is dated to this date in their systems, according to special adviser Birgitte Frisch.
The special forces of the armed forces downgrade the information after being asked to assess it with the Defense Staff. Lander writes to VG that it is being done to “clarify the matter”. The information is shared with the Defense Staff’s communications unit.
The Minister of Defence’s reply is sent to the Storting. He says he cannot answer details of the operation “without going into classified information”. He also refers to his previous answers and adds that “information in classified reports from completed operations cannot be released”.
The Ministry of Defense states that they are learning for the first time that information about the operation has been declassified.
The target of the operation was Taliban leader Qari Nejat. The declassified information shows the following: The prisoner gave his name as Mohammed Naseem. But it was added that the prisoner was most likely the wanted Taliban leader, who was the target of the operation.
Headquarters in Norway and the ISAF chain of command in Afghanistan learned that the prisoner gave the name Naseem in the daily situation report.
The arrested Afghan was released after a short time.
“Up until 5 April, we have dealt with the information we had received from the Norwegian Armed Forces prior to the information being made public,” writes special adviser Birgitte Frisch in the Ministry of Defense in an e-mail to VG.
Recently graduated information
This information about the operation has now been declassified and shared with the Storting:
“Joint operational headquarters (FOHK) was informed that the operation was successful and that the target had been captured in the daily situation report. Around the same time, information about the detainee was sent to both FOHK and the International Security Assistance Force (ISAFInternational Security Assistance Force, a NATO-led security mission in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2014.) chain of command, under this what an identity he gave himself (Mohammed Naseem), together with an assessment that his real identity was most likely the target of the operation. On 19 September, the information was kept up in a joint transmission to FOHK, from Task Force 51, in connection with redeploymentWhen military forces are moved from one location to another, often from an operational area back to their home country. of the force”
View more
The defense first informed VG that they downgraded the information on 27 November, i.e. after Gram’s reply was sent to the Storting.
Lander later writes in a new e-mail to VG that the date they stated was wrong. According to him, the correct dates for the downgrades are 13 and 14 November. It is before Gram’s answer is sent to the Storting, but after the Ministry of Defense says that their answer is dated with them.
– What was the reason why the Armed Forces did not inform the ministry about the downgrading?
– The defense initially assessed that the information that had been declassified was exempt from public disclosure, writes Lander in an e-mail to VG.
– Understands that questions are asked
Gram shared the now declassified information with the Storting on Wednesday.
“I understand that questions are being asked in this case”, writes Gram in his reply.
Gram emphasizes at the same time that it is still not possible for him to talk about certain details from the operation, because it is classified.
Degraded information is information that has previously been classified as secret or confidential, but which has later had its security level reduced so that it can be shared more openly. This often happens when the information is no longer considered sensitive for national security or when it is in the public interest to gain access to the information.
Bjørn Arild Gram is a Norwegian politician from the Center Party. He is responsible for leading the Ministry of Defense and for handling matters related to Norway’s defense and security.
A central principle in Norwegian politics is that the government must answer truthfully and comprehensively to questions from the Storting. Without this, the Storting cannot effectively oversee the government’s work. For a minister, it is serious to misinform the Storting. If the failure is serious enough, it may lead to a minister having to resign.
On 17 September 2007, Norwegian special forces went into action in a valley to capture a notorious and wanted Taliban leader called Qari Nejat. It has become one of the most praised and discussed Norwegian operations in Afghanistan.
15 years after the operation, VG could say that the wrong person was arrested: The prisoner was not a leader and, according to American intelligence, was a bricklayer. VG was able to document that the man was released shortly after his arrest. Chief of Defense Eirik Kristoffersen still believes that the person they arrested was a Taliban leader and says that they arrested the man who was designated by the intelligence while they were on the target.
VG has asked the Ministry of Defense whether Gram has misinformed the Storting, given incorrect information to the public – or whether he should have been informed earlier.
“The Defense Department degradated information related to the case complex on 13 and 14 November 2023. Our response to the Storting to question 15:326 (2023-2024) was dated 13 November and sent to the Storting on 16 November,” writes Frisch in the Ministry of Defense in an e- mail to VG.
“Subsequently, there has also been an assessment of the publication of the information in light of the fact that it only forms a minor part of a larger graded information entity and therefore does not contribute to clarifying the matter,” she adds.
– Would the minister have been able to answer the Storting in more detail, if the information had been downgraded at the time?
– We respond to the Storting according to the information we have at the time we respond, writes Frisch.
Tags: information secret true
-
