Norway rejects U.S. request to destroy Syrian chemical arms

OSLO Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:19am EDT

Norway's Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide (L) and Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Norwegian Parliament Ine Marie Eriksen Soreide prepare to speak to the media in Oslo, August 28, 2013. REUTERS/Cornelius Poppe/NTB Scanpix

Norway's Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide (L) and Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Norwegian Parliament Ine Marie Eriksen Soreide prepare to speak to the media in Oslo, August 28, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Cornelius Poppe/NTB Scanpix

Related Topics

OSLO (Reuters) - Norway rejected on Friday a U.S. request to help destroy Syria's chemical arms, arguing that the Nordic nation was an unsuitable site because it lacked suitable staff, equipment and regulations.

Washington asked NATO-member Norway last month to help destroy some of Syria's chemical arsenal in a deal brokered with Moscow after an August 21 attack in the suburbs of Damascus killed 1,400 people. Several other nations are also being asked.

The Norwegian foreign ministry said the country had given "serious and thorough consideration" to the U.S. request but it was not best suited "due to time constraints and external factors, such as capacities, regulatory requirements".

"The two nations have come to the joint understanding that Norway is not the most suitable location for this destruction," a statement said.

On Wednesday, new Foreign Minister Boerge Brende told a news conference that Norway lacked equipment and that Norwegian law would ban storage of the waste.

That meant other countries would first have to guarantee to import and store the destroyed chemicals after they were treated in Norway, he said. Norway could use a U.S. mobile destruction unit but winter cold could be a disadvantage, he said.

(Reporting by Alister Doyle; Editing by Pravin Char)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
Tiu wrote:
Why not dump it in Australia? They’ve got lots of holes in the ground, and lots of empty space. The Forbidden Zone right in the middle would be ideal, and it’s already got all the military stuff, run-ways etc in situ.

Oct 25, 2013 7:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.