You couldn’t quite hear it, but I’m sure that’s what the Prime Minister was chanting late last week. Either that or I can’t understand what all the controversy was about. Let me back up a bit.
Several times over several months, I had seen a picture of a fighter jet on Aftenposten’s website accompanied by some text about “USA.” Finally, I asked my fiancee what was going on. She replied that she hadn’t opened any of the articles, but it was some silly debate about whether to buy fighter jets from the US or Sweden.
“Huh?”
I couldn’t (and still can’t) wrap my head around why anyone actually cares. Isn’t this exactly why we have representative governments? To avoid situations where the masses are analyzing competing bids between Lockheed Martin (USA) and Jas Gripen (Sweden) on replacements for Norway’s F-16 fleet? What are the odds that anyone you stop on Karl Johan’s Gate actually has any idea about the requirements necessary for new jets, the quality of each company’s bid, or even the overall budget for Norway?
(Is that enough rhetorical questions yet?)
The only thing I can really come up with for why the public cared so much about this decision is either the standard anti-American sentiment or pro-Scandinavian sentiment. Some have mentioned ethical arguments, but arguments for the existence of an ethical warfare company are stretched at best. In the end, Norway chose Lockheed Martin’s bid, saying that it was the only one that fulfilled all of Norway’s requirements and it was cheaper. Not mentioned, but a likely factor is that Norway was a partner in the jet’s development, contributing $122 million.
Score one for pragmatic decision making.
After posting on its homepage that it would have a stand at an upcoming job fair in 
Denmark lagged behind in 7th. At the other end of the spectrum,
Don’t believe me? According to some smart guys with PhD’s who probably did a lot of research on the matter, Norway ranks #3 in a list of the world’s “