The same reason we "tolerate" NSA + friends and foes spying on the whole world?

Well, the Western intelligence agencies all have data sharing agreements, so it's not "tolerance", it's collusion. Funny how the US is the big bad evil one but even is in bed with the ideas and behaviors.

It's just a game Europe plays with its electorate. Points fingers at the US while making backdoor deals.

And why do we tolerate that?

Because Russia is doing it.

Bulletproof logic

I have to ask the same question: why do we tolerate this Russophobia, where "Russia" is used as a boogeyman to solve the internal political problems, and redirect the outrage away from the real issues facing our societies?

This whole issue has been so old, it's been one of the story plots in a popular 1980s British TV show called Yes, Prime Minister:

- Why don't you expel 76 Soviet diplomats? That has been our practice in the past, when we wished to ensure that the press lose interest in something?

- I can do that?!

- It must be a story that nobody can disprove.

- And which will be believed even if it's denied!

https://twitter.com/rusembmalta/status/980521180460388352

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FW10zLDI3Eg

(Yes, Prime Minister, "Official Secrets", 1987)

Looks like russophobia nowadays is everything that uncover Putin's actions. Invading Ukraine - russophobia. Shooting down MH-17 - russophobia. Trying to overthrow government in Montenegro - russophobia. Cheating in Olympics - russophobia. Hacking foreign governments - russophobia. Using forbidden chemical weapons - RUSSOPHOBIA! This line of defense looks ridiculous, though.

Who's "we", and do "we"? What can be done besides sanctions, like the US imposed upon Russia for the election meddling scandal?

Actually enforcing and expanding the sanctions rather than have opportunistic political operatives immediately undermine them before they've even taken office and then have the administration who benefitted from the meddling water down the sanctions when actually inaugurated.

They're still being sanctioned for that. [0]

[0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-imposes-sanctions-over-russ...

These new sanctions are for interfering in the 2020 elections, on behalf of the Trump campaign, who didn't adequately punish them for their interference in the 2016 election. Which might go to motive for why those first sanctions were so unevenly enforced.

Because this is run-of-the-mill espionage, which is as old as nation states. Older than nation states, in fact.

And because we do it too.

The better question is - why does your question get asked every single time that <some country> spies on <some country>. Is it because the question-asker is against espionage in general, or is it because they are fine with the concept, but are against espionage being directed at them?

Tricky to do much about it. Haters gonna hate. Russians gonna hack and sow disinformation...

because russia has nukes.

Simple reason. Nobody wants to start WW3 and nobody wants to buy expensive raw materials somewhere else.

Other than that the only viable strategy is to do the same to Russia. Keep them busy and stretch their resources thin so their government implodes.

But I guess nobody really has the balls to do it.

Certainly not the EU.

There's also the simple fact that nobody wants to set a strong precedent because everybody is doing it. The US was spying on Merkel, Germany's BND was caught spying on Turkey, Turkey was caught spying in Germany (and pretty-much-caught assassinating Kurdish French citizens in France) etc pp, Norway spies on Russia, Russia spies on Norway.

That's normal. Of course each one is unhappy when it's done to them, but nobody wants to do anything about it, because it might be done to them as well.

Althought one might argue that spying is one thing while attacking/sabotaging is another thing.

I might tolerate you peeking through my window into my house from time to time to try and understand what i'm up to.

I wouldn't tolerate you burning my house down to prevent me from doing my stuff.

That's true, but I believe this incident was espionage, not an attack with destructive intention. Spies usually don't want your email server to stop working, because they'd lose access to your emails and you'd notice something is up.

> Certainly not the EU

Norway isn't in EU

For strategic and trade purposes, isn't Norway tightly aligned to the EU despite non-membership? I interpret this as corralling both internal and EU support.

It's a member of European Economic Community, the predecessor to EU.

Norway will probably ask NATO for help to launch contra cyber attacks.

Norway is a part of EFTA, EEA and the Schengen agreement, so they're bound pretty tightly with the EU.

I wouldn't, however, interpret any actions from Norway as having any form of EU support, unless it's explicitly mentioned.

And I have not suggested it is. Realistically the only power in the region capable of standing up to Russia is the EU.

Norway could not do it even if it wanted to.

Norway does not need the region. Norway is part of the NATO pact. Russia knows it. Sticks and stones will eventually come into play, aka realpolitik. The US will intervene as long as that dipshit president does not manage to stumble into the way.

NATO is brain dead.

NATO is realpolitik. It might be that you don't know its origins, what it represents and what its mechanisms are. I recommend you study it. And by the way: It goes both ways. The defence pact is reciprocal. When the US is attacked, all members of NATO are obliged to contribute for its defense and offense as well. It is not a one way thing where the US only contributes one direction.

It is most certainly NOT braindead. You Sir, are wrong.

Above commenter is quoting Emmanuel Macron.[1] Macron called the alliance "brain dead" after Turkey, a NATO member, invaded Syria, attacking Kurdish forces backed by Turkey's NATO allies.

1. https://youtu.be/yo5Zw4XdAfQ

I see. Without context, I didn't follow. Thank you.

Yes sorry, I should have been being more explicit that I was approximately citing Macron.

Norway has enough friends they believe they can count on. They are probably right.

It’s easy to say no one has balls for it, especially when it might mean that German people freeze during winter because they lose access to Russian gas.

Attempts to circumvent Russia and get access to other pipelines usually escalate things Georgia was at least partially due to the Caspian pipelines and Ukraine was also due to Russia not being particularly fuzzy about the possibility of the Ukraine getting closer to the west.

The EU and NATO have been expanding eastward and like it or not it does makes Russia nervous.

Moscow used to be 1000’s of miles from the border now the distance can be covered by mechanized infantry in a day.

Russia is essentially a landlocked country they don’t have access to the open seas, their airspace is also heavily restricted by less than friendly nations.

It’s behavior is very much dictated by geography.

>Russia is essentially a landlocked country they don’t have access to the open seas

They have access to three seas and one ocean. Just friendly FYI.

They don’t have warm water ports that don’t require traversal through unfriendly territories.

The closest they have is Vladivostok and that isn’t a warm water port (yet).