One of the most basal fears in the human psyche is the fear of the unknown. It is this fear that has for example generated myths about unexplored regions of the world and the universe throughout history. These myths have served as explanations where empirical evidence has been missing in order to expel the menacing void in our knowledge. The same logic can be applied to the unknown and seemingly mysterious motives behind unexplainable acts of horrific violence.
The terrorist attacks in Oslo and on Utøya island on 22 July 2011 sent shock waves throughout the nation of Norway and the rest of Scandinavia. Despite what the investigators and the public know about the motives of the apprehended perpetrator not many people can even begin to understand them on an emotional level. The number of victims do not come near the number of people killed in the attacks on September 11th2001 in the United States but in a nation with a little less than 5 million residents the repercussions of nearly one hundred victims are painfully potent. The tragedy has even made its way into the Norwegian royal family where the crown princess Mette-Marit mourns her stepbrother Trond Berntsen, an off-duty police officer who was among the killed on Utøya island. The fact that most of the victims where young people once again bring back Herodotus’ quotation about parents burying their children in times of war instead of the other way around, which is an unnatural cycle of life.
In the nexus of turmoil stands Anders Behring Breivik. Fueled by anger and contempt for everyone who did not share his view on how the world should be he committed the most horrific attack in Norway since the German wartime occupation in the 1940s. Unlike the suicide attackers of Islamism commonly featured in press and television this terrorist is fully alive in the custody of the Norwegian police and attracts the full attention of media. The Norwegian news agency NRK could report about “chaos outside the Oslo Courthouse” which was more or less besieged by the press. The coming months will probably witness what kind of associations the media will create around Behring Breivik and whether he will become a focal point for right-wing extremism throughout Europe. He asked for openness in the detention process, a possible sign of his ambition to promote his message to the world. Lack of openness during the process of detention and trial may diminish the element of democracy but reduce the risk of giving Behring Breivik the chance to spread propaganda to the public ear. There is a historical parallel to this dilemma in the trial against Adolf Hitler after his failed coup d’état in the early 1920s where he managed to pull a propaganda victory with his rhetorical skills before the judge and the German public. With this in consideration the Norwegian legal system must make several hard choices and hope for the best outcome even though the prospects are gloomy.
The Norwegians have however shown proof of tremendous unity and compassion with the victims and their families and friends. Not many will remember the images of the memorial mass for grief and hope in the Oslo Cathedral without a sense of pride and admiration for the Norwegian people’s commitment not to abandon the democratic values and give in to hatred and vengeance. It is therefore easy to understand why the British Prime Minister Winston Churchill had Norway close to his heart in the light of its staunch resistance against overwhelming odds.
Daniel Nykvist
