The Chief of Defense does not want tanks. The Minister of Defense wants that. There are strongly divided opinions about tank purchases both in politics and internally in the Armed Forces.
Nov 27 2022 12:44
Last updated just now
Chief of Defense Eirik Kristoffersen earlier this week gave Defense Minister Bjør Arild Gram (Sp) a recommendation to stop the process of acquiring new tanks for the Army. The chief of defense himself confirms this to the Defense Forum.
According to Dagens Næringsliv, which mentioned the matter first, Kristoffersen would rather invest in new helicopters and long-range weapons for the Army.
Broad political agreement on tanks
Kristoffersen wants to stop a procurement process that is well under way, and on which there has been broad political agreement.
It was the Solberg government and a political majority in the Storting that at the time gave the go-ahead for the acquisition. Since then, the Støre government has had it as a separate point in the Hurdal platform: “Invest in new tanks for the Army”.
The process is so advanced that what remains for Defense Materiel in principle is to choose which tank to invest NOK 19.3 billion in. It is now between the German Leopard 2A7 and the South Korean K2 Black Panther. Final negotiations took place in November, according to Defense Materiel director Gro Jære.
According to the plan, the Army will get 82 new tanks. The defence’s current tanks, of the type Leopard 1 and Leopard 2A4, are over 40 years old and must be demanding to keep in operation.
The aim has been to sign an agreement on the purchase of new tanks during the year.
In the new year, then Defense Minister Odd Roger Enoksen (Sp) had both candidates test drive at Rena. At the time, Enoksen said that there was no doubt that the Norwegian Armed Forces needed new tanks.
Following Kristoffersen’s recommendation to stop the purchase, the reactions have not been long in coming.
The process continues, doesn’t it?
Defense Minister Gram was quick to state that the procurement process “is proceeding in line with the progress plan that has been laid out”.
Lieutenant General Yngve Odlo has also commented on the defense chief’s recommendation. Odlo, who is head of the Norwegian Armed Forces’ operational headquarters (FOH), told the Defense Forum that the need for tanks is well documented and that he sees no alternative to them in the next 15-20 years.
Others believe that, as a result of Kristoffersen’s recommendation, the brakes must be pulled. Among them is Frp’s defense policy spokesperson Christian Tybring-Gjedde. He believes that you have to listen to the chief of defense and that tanks are “a crazy priority”.
Retired Lieutenant General Robert Mood also thinks so. On https://twitter.com/MoodRobert/status/1595801184769822723 he calls Kristoffersen’s recommendation “absolutely correct”. He asks Defense Minister Gram to follow the recommendation.
The head of the foreign affairs and defense committee, Ine Eriksen Søreide (H), has also commented on the matter. She is open to reconsidering the decision. She will wait for the chief of defense’s professional military advice and the report from the Defense Commission. Both are expected in the spring.
– It is crucial to see the decision whether or not to acquire tanks as a whole. Both with a view to how the Army will be set up with main combat systems for the next decades, how the Armed Forces think about joint operability between all the Armed Forces’ combat systems and what comprehensive defense concept is laid as a basis, Søreide told DN.
Venstre leader Guri Melby also has opinions about the tank dispute. She points out that you have to listen to the expert military advice, and she signs off https://twitter.com/gurimelby/status/1596166228036714497 that she looks forward to reading more holistically about how Kristroffersen “considers that Norway can best be defended”.
Here, like Eriksen Søreide, she is referring to the councils and the report that will come in the spring.
“We need a Norwegian defense that takes into account both technological development and the fact that Norway’s geostrategic landscape is undergoing major changes.” writes Melby further.
No obligation to enter into a contract
Lawyer Marianne Dragsten from Vaar Advokat AS is one of the country’s foremost experts on public procurement. She says that the regulations never oblige a client to enter into a contract.
– If a need changes, then you will be able to cancel the competition regardless of where you are in the race, says Dragsten and continues:
– A cancellation will probably result in the client having to pay compensation for the expenses the tank manufacturers have had in the competition. These can be extensive, but the public sector can never be forced to carry out the acquisition of something they have no use for.
Dragsten further points out that you are not actually allowed to cancel if you cancel with “substitute arguments”.
– But in a case like this, where you argue that you have more use for other types of defense equipment than tanks, you are much freer.
– So if you end up canceling the competition, won’t it be more painful than having to pay compensation to the competitors?
– No. That will probably be all. If a reservation has been made about cancellation in the competition terms, it is not certain that you need to pay compensation at all, says Dragsten.
