As an Iranian in exile, I view developments in Norway with great concern. This is a country where human rights are prioritised in ceremonial speeches, yet which subsequently opts for ‘dialogue’ with the perpetrators. Not because of a lack of information, but because it suits them.
On 23 September, Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre met Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian at the UN. The government issued a photograph and a press release. Støre had expressed “deep concern” about human rights. Then he said what really matters: “The conflict must be resolved through diplomacy, not through pressure or violence.”
Not a single word about stopping the use of the gallows
‘Not through pressure or violence’, said to a regime that uses the gallows for political ends. ‘All parties bear responsibility’, he added. Both the one who tightens the noose and the one who hangs from it.
The day before, State Secretary Andreas Kravik met with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in New York. Two meetings in two days with the same regime. Kravik discussed diplomatic solutions between the US and Iran and had been “clear” on Norway’s position: any solution in the Strait of Hormuz must fall within the framework of the law of the sea. Not a word about stopping the use of the gallows. Not a single name of protesters killed or sentenced to death.
Just before Støre shook Pezeshkian’s hand officially, the president stood at the UN podium and called Iran “a victim of terrorism” and praised Khamenei. The US delegation walked out of the meeting. Norway remained and booked two meetings with the ‘victims of terrorism’.
So far in 2026, the Abdorrahman Boroumand Centre has documented over 1,000 executions in Iran. At least 900 of these took place by the end of July. One of them was a mother of six. In addition to this, at least 42,000 demonstrators were killed during the January protests, when the mullahs crushed the people’s uprising. On 22 September, the same day that Kravik met with Araghchi, prisoners in 64 Iranian prisons went on hunger strike in protest against the executions.
Støre reacted more strongly to Donald Trump’s UN speech than to Iran’s use of the gallows
Kravik met Araghchi in Tehran in May, just months after the January massacre. Now he met him again at the UN, whilst Støre met the president. Both delivered the same message: first shipping, then diplomacy between the US and Iran, then a statement expressing ‘concern’. In January, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs summoned Iran’s ambassador and condemned “gross and disproportionate violence”. After that, the machinery retreated and had a cup of coffee. That was enough ‘responsibility’ for this time.
This, then, is ‘principled’ Norwegian foreign policy. Norwegian diplomacy treats the Islamic regime as a ‘difficult’ partner, not as a terrorist organisation. Støre reacted more strongly to Donald Trump’s UN speech than to Iran’s use of the gallows.
Støre: – Trump wants to wipe out Iranian civilisation
On 22 September, Trump said he faced a choice: either to reach an agreement that would allow Iran to rebuild itself into ‘a far greater nation than it has ever been’, or to destroy the Islamic Republic so that it could never again kill and destroy. He emphasised the ‘Islamic Republic’ and contrasted the rebuilding of the country with the crushing of the regime. Støre reacted to this, describing the language as “violent and dark”.
Støre told TV 2 and NRK that Trump wanted to wipe out Iranian civilisation. But Trump said: The Islamic Republic. Støre equated the Islamic Republic with the people. The regime is the people, and the people are the regime. When Iranians rise up against the mullahs, it doesn’t fit the narrative. When Trump distinguishes civilisation from the theocracy, the distinction is blurred. Hence ‘deep concern’ for Pezeshkian and moral outrage at Trump. Hence the silence regarding the tens of thousands killed in January, whilst the Strait of Hormuz and shipping receive all the attention.
On 24 September, Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a speech at the UN. Many delegations walked out, whilst Espen Barth Eide remained seated – credit to him for that. He subsequently described the speech as ‘deeply disturbing’. ‘Netanyahu does not acknowledge the suffering of others.’ According to Eide – the man who, the day before, had announced an additional 125 million kroner for Palestine via the UN and the World Bank, including budget support for the Palestinian public sector – Netanyahu’s statements on settler violence and civilians in Gaza were incorrect. In total, Norway will provide around one billion to Palestine in 2026.
Budget support for the ‘pay-for-slay’ programme
Israel defends its population against Hamas, Hezbollah and an Iranian regime that has spent decades and billions seeking to wipe out the Jewish state. That is a state’s duty. For the Norwegian authorities, the defence is the problem, not ‘Palestine’; that bottomless pit which Norway is expected to finance. Is Palestine the responsibility of the Norwegian people? Wouldn’t it be a project for the neighbouring oil-rich states if it were a matter of brotherhood rather than strategy?
Norway does not merely provide ‘aid’ to Palestine. According to Eide, the funds include budgetary support for the public sector. For years, the Palestinian Authority has paid salaries to imprisoned terrorists and grants to their families following attacks, scaled according to the length of the sentence. The worse the crime, the more money. The system is known as ‘pay-for-slay’.
Abbas claimed in February 2025 that the scheme had been abolished, a claim the US State Department refuted in April 2026. In its report to Congress, the State Department wrote that in 2025 the PA paid out $156 million to terrorists, released terrorists and families following attacks, and that the scheme continues through new mechanisms and under a different name. The PA’s Finance Minister, Estephan Salameh, said in February 2026 that they had not forgotten the prisoners or the families of the ‘martyrs’. It is a matter of principle, he said. The European Commission has expressed regret that payments have continued after Ramallah promised to end them. Nevertheless, Norway is increasing its support, including budgetary support for a public apparatus that has for years rewarded murder.
I am familiar with that case. It is Iranian
Khomeini said that Palestine ‘is our cause’. He did not care about the Iranians. Arafat was among the first to welcome the coup leaders in 1979. Since then, the regime has pumped money into Hamas and Hezbollah, whilst Iranian teachers, hospitals and young people were kept down. Money that should have gone to Iranians went to militias. The people were given sermons, whilst the proxies were given weapons.
Støre and Eide are repeating the pattern with Norwegian taxpayers’ money. Palestine is their cause, whilst the killing of Iranians is a mere footnote. Meetings are arranged with the Islamic regime where Hamas is downplayed and Israel is lectured on morality. At home, the price is the same: Islamist groups are given space, funding and dialogue with few strings attached, even in the classroom, whilst local authorities run deficits. For Tehran, this handshake is proof that the use of the gallows costs them nothing in Oslo.
The government will reply that states must talk to their enemies, that Norway is a nation of peace, and that contact is better than isolation. Contact without a price is not diplomacy. In September, Sweden expelled an Iranian diplomat for activities against the opposition and against Jewish and Israeli interests. In Oslo, a security guard at the US Embassy was convicted of selling secrets to Iran and Russia. Norway responded with two meetings and an official handshake at the UN. It is a choice of sides.
A free Iran will remember who shook hands with the executioner
The day will come when Iran is rid of the mullahs, and that day is closer than Støre and Eide seem to believe. Then a free Iran will remember who shook hands with the executioner whilst the lists of those executed grew. They will remember who called Trump ‘dark’ because he named the Islamic Republic, and who let January 2026 pass without comment. Reza Pahlavi and the Iranian people owe them no thanks for their concern.
History makes a distinction. The people and the regime are not one and the same. Allies and terrorist regimes are not one and the same. A country that claims to defend human rights, yet prioritises dialogue with the butchers and funding for their cause, has made a choice. That choice will remain when the images from the UN have been forgotten.
