Foreign Policy Address to the Storting

Translation from the Norwegian
Check against delivery

Mr President,

I would like to begin this address with a review of the events of the past week and the attacks on Norwegian embassies and Norwegian personnel deployed in international operations.

The situation in Afghanistan became critical yesterday when demonstrators attacked the Provincial Reconstruction Team’s military camp in Meymaneh in northern Afghanistan.

There are a total of 54 troops at the camp, 34 of whom are Norwegian. They are part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and therefore under NATO command. Six Norwegian soldiers were injured, but not seriously, when demonstrators forced their way into the area. Two of the injured soldiers were evacuated for treatment.

In cooperation with NATO we are doing what we can to ensure the safety of our personnel. The North Atlantic Council discussed the situation yesterday and is meeting again this morning. Secretary General Scheffer commended the Norwegian soldiers for the way they had responded and helped to calm the situation. The Secretary General held talks with President Karzai after Prime Minister Stoltenberg talked to him earlier in the day.

In addition to the response of the troops, the support it was possible to call on from other forces in the region, including other ISAF forces and support from Dutch F16 planes, was important in regaining control over the situation. This attack demonstrates the difficult situation our forces are working under. However it has also shown that ISAF has the capacity to respond firmly and responsibly.

The ISAF forces are playing an important role in stabilising Afghanistan and supporting the country’s elected president and national assembly.

The conference in London last week, where 60 countries were represented, was a clear expression of the political support for Afghanistan’s development. At the conference, Norway announced that in addition to continuing our military contribution to ISAF, we will be continuing our economic support of NOK 200 million a year until 2010. We will also provide considerable funding for humanitarian operations.

Our message is clear. Norway is prepared to meet its long-term commitments in Afghanistan, taking part in NATO operations, through bilateral efforts and through various UN channels.

Mr President,

The government deplores the attack on the Norwegian Embassy in Damascus last Saturday. We have made it clear to the Syrian authorities that we hold them responsible for the safety of the Embassy and its staff. I was in contact with my Syrian colleague about this on Saturday afternoon. Norway delivered a formal note of protest to the Syrian Ministry of Foreign Affairs this morning.

We have reduced our staff at the Embassy. We have advised Norwegians to leave Syria and have assisted those who wished to leave.

We expect an explanation from the Syrian authorities. We will demand compensation for the damage to the Embassy. We will report the attack to the relevant UN bodies and underline that it was a clear violation of the Vienna Convention’s provisions on the responsibility of host countries to protect embassies and diplomatic staff.

In the near future we will be evaluating the situation and the conditions for our continued diplomatic presence in Damascus. As you know, this Embassy is also responsible for our diplomatic ties with Lebanon.

We will remain in contact with the governments in the region to ensure that they take their responsibility as host countries seriously, and we will keep in particularly close touch with our Nordic neighbours and the EU.

I had a long talk with the Iranian Foreign Minister after the demonstrations outside the Danish Embassy in Iran earlier this week. I made it clear that we hold the Iranian authorities responsible for the safety of the Norwegian Embassy and Norwegian personnel. My Iranian colleague ensured me that Iran was taking this responsibility seriously.

Yesterday evening there was a demonstration outside Norway’s Embassy in Teheran. Windows were broken, but the police were able bring the situation under control. The Embassy staff are in safety. We are following the situation closely and will remind the Iranian authorities of their responsibility.

At the moment there are no indications of specific threats against Norwegian nationals or Norwegian diplomatic missions. We have been informed that in most places the situation is now calmer.

But we are monitoring the situation on a continuous basis. Our impression is that the reactions are targeted towards national symbols rather than individual people. We have increased the level of security at our missions in a number of countries. The safety of embassy staff is our highest priority. Our travel advice will be updated as required.

What happened in Damascus and Beirut last weekend and similar events in other places this week are in themselves extremely serious. They are also indicative of the current international situation.

What is said or published in one part of the world can be spread to all corners of the world via the Internet in a matter of seconds. Words or pictures that do have much impact in one country may be perceived as deeply offensive by millions of people in other countries. The reactions become mixed up with and reinforce other patterns of conflict, the frustration of large groups of people and internal strife in various countries.

The result is growing confrontation and an imminent danger of escalation and the use of violence. In such circumstances the agenda is set by the most extreme groups. Extreme utterances trigger extreme reactions. The situation is being exploited by groups and regimes that have their own agenda. The result can be a snowball effect.

The situation we are in today underlines how important it is to make it quite clear that the use of violence is unacceptable. This situation calls for moderation and for the will, ability and courage to enter into dialogue. This is why we are intending the visit by State Secretary Johansen to Iran next week to go ahead as planned. However we will review this in the light of developments.

The vast majority of people do not want violence and confrontation. The situation in the Middle East, and particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, requires wise political decisions, the will to negotiate and a sense of joint responsibility. I have noted the many statements by political and religious leaders who are denouncing the use of violence and are also emphasising the importance of showing respect for all religions.

This issue has clear links to the situation at home. It illustrates how closely foreign policy and domestic policy are intertwined.

Here in Norway, we see that on the whole, dialogue and communication have triumphed over confrontation. Dialogue does not eliminate conflicts of interest. But dialogue can help us to understand them, live with them – and master them. This is perhaps the greatest challenge we are facing today.

But dialogue depends on freedom of expression. Freedom of expression is a fundamental principle and inviolable good of our society, and one we intend to safeguard. Willingness to engage in dialogue and show respect for other people’s faiths, preferences and opinions is another fundamental principle we will protect. We must now put this principle into practice.

I would like to commend the leaders of many different religious groups who, at an early stage, emphasised the importance of dialogue and mutual respect. The Head of the Islamic Council in Norway made a good point when he said that the Norwegian Embassy was his embassy as well, and that the Norwegian flag was his flag as well.

Mr President,

I will return to the situation in the Middle East later in my address. The events of the last few days could have pushed other foreign policy issues to one side in this annual address to the Storting. But in my opinion that would be inappropriate. We must be able to deal with a critical situation and at the same time maintain our focus on the overall foreign policy picture, which also requires attention.

Since this is the Government’s first foreign policy address, I would now like to give an outline of the Government’s overall approach to our foreign policy tasks. I will focus on some of the areas that require particular attention at the beginning of 2006. This will not be a full catalogue of current issues, but an account of the main principles and areas of concern to us.

Mr President,

Human dignity and human welfare are at the core of foreign policy – indeed of all policy. The Government’s foreign policy is based on the values set out in its policy platform: the common good, justice and equitable distribution.

It is impossible to make a sharp distinction between domestic policy and foreign policy in the world today, as the events of the last few days shows very clearly.

Norwegians are interested and involved in international issues. Many are very knowledgeable.

The Government welcomes debate and values the involvement of the public. Foreign policy has hidden away behind closed doors for too long. Many of these doors should be opened. More people should be allowed in. More people should be heard.

The Government is following three main tracks in its foreign policy. I will repeat them here today because they determine our approach to individual issues.

The first track involves supporting the further development of an international legal system that regulates the use of force and prevents the domination of the weak by the strong, and where the world’s nations and people recognise the benefits of cooperating to find solutions to the major issues of our time.

The promotion of human rights and disarmament, combating the proliferation of nuclear weapons, improving multilateral environmental agreements; rules to prevent over fishing, fair-trade agreements, binding rules to prevent human trafficking and abuse of women; ensuring humane treatment of prisoners in all situations, strengthening employees’ rights in the WTO system. All these form the pillars of the international community.

Our own society is based on the rule of law, on a political system that allows redistribution and has addressed poverty by investing in health care, education and equal opportunities for all. In the Government’s view, the international community should be based on the same approach. Norway will be at the forefront of efforts to achieve a more just and inclusive world.

The best way to achieve this is to strengthen and reform the UN and other multilateral institutions. The UN Summit last autumn highlighted important areas where action is needed in the fields of peacebuilding, human rights, security and protection of vulnerable groups. We will be at the forefront of efforts to respond. We want the UN to have a strong and confident profile, but also to be willing to look critically at itself and make the necessary reforms.

The second track of our foreign policy involves maintaining and further developing our relations with our friends and allies, it means being the friend of our friends. Our membership of NATO is an important pillar of our foreign policy. We also have close ties with the other Nordic and European countries through the EEA Agreement and other arrangements, and have a close friendship and cooperation with the US.

Norway can only promote its own interests if there are other like-minded countries that are prepared to listen, understand and support our views. We have our own independent voice and we will express our views clearly. But our security still depends on solidarity and participation in the Alliance, and on the strength of our transatlantic ties. It is our responsibility to look after this anchorage point and to deepen our relations with countries outside our part of the world.

We must cultivate these friendships in our foreign policy. Friendship involves knowing one another. It involves trust, openness, the freedom to disagree and the freedom to say so. We depend on our friends honouring their commitments to Norway, confident that we will honour our commitments to them.

With this in view, we will take part the debate on the future role and structure of NATO in the run-up to the summit in the autumn. It is important that political dialogue takes place within NATO, where we can discuss new security challenges with our European and American allies, and maintain the solidarity that is vital to Norway.

The third track in our foreign policy involves utilising the opportunities we have to promote peace, reconciliation and development. We are in a particularly good position to do this, which gives us a historic responsibility to help people who are suffering from conflict and want to forge a future of peace and development.

We take a long-term approach to promoting a more just world order that will ensure redistribution and the transfer of technology and enable developing countries to realise their own development potential. At the same time we will seize opportunities in situations where we can make a difference.

Let me give you two examples. The first is the support given by the first Stoltenberg Government to the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, the newly launched initiative to give all the world’s children access to vaccination. This gave the alliance a substantial head start. We did this because we recognised the potential of the initiative and were prepared to make a long-term commitment. This was continued under the subsequent Bondevik Government and now this new coalition Government is intensifying the efforts. We may be able to realise our vision of playing a leading role in efforts to achieve Millennium Development Goal number four – to reduce the mortality rate among children under five by two thirds by 2015.

The second example is in the field of peace and reconciliation, where Norwegians have recognised the strategic position our country has to act as a neutral third party in the conflict in Sri Lanka. This has produced results. We have expressed our willingness to continue in this role as long as both parties want us to and as long as we feel that we can make a constructive contribution. The Minister of International Development has succeeded in getting the parties to agree to resume negotiations. They will meet on 22 and 23 February in Geneva to discuss how the implementation of the cease-fire agreement and the security situation can be improved. This will be the first time for three years that there has been such a high-level meeting between the parties.

Our general approach will be to maintain a strategic perspective so that we are able to identify opportunities to contribute to peace, reconciliation and development. We will not spread ourselves too thin, but will focus our efforts where our clear and predictable approach will be most useful.

There are many links between the three tracks of our foreign policy.

Norway will work towards a more secure world based on the rule of law and justice. Norway wants to be supported by friends we can trust and who trust us. Norway will promote peace, reconciliation and development. Our ability to succeed on one of these tracks will largely depend on our ability to coordinate our positions and activities along the other two.

These tracks will guide us as we set priorities and determine our strategy for maintaining Norway’s security, protecting Norway’s interests and enhancing Norway’s contribution to a more just world.

Mr President,

I would now like to turn to some of the key items on our foreign policy agenda, which are central elements of the Government’s policy platform and include some issues of immediate importance today.

First, the High North, which the Government has defined as Norway’s most important strategic priority in the years ahead.

Our High North policy has to safeguard Norway’s interests and security. We need to promote economic growth, employment, living standards and settlement. We need to ensure proper management of the resources in the sea, knowledge development, and cultural cooperation in an international environment. Our High North policy also involves our relations with Russia, the environment and climate issues in vulnerable Arctic areas, the rights of indigenous people, and important aspects of our relations with our neighbours and partners.

This is why our High North policy is an important part of Norway’s European and security policy.

The Government has a vision of the Barents Sea as a sea of cooperation – cooperation in a stable setting, with clear boundaries, clear rules for economic activity and high environmental standards, where Norway is recognised by its neighbours as a predictable and reliable coastal state that meets its management responsibilities.

Our engagement in the north takes its inspiration from the Barents cooperation that started in the early 1990s. The Cold War is a thing of the past. We are now by returning to cooperation patterns that existed before 1917. At the same time we are aware that we depend on our partners and allies for stability. We must ensure that no one can take the law into their own hands in this region.

The Government’s High North policy is based on the decisions the Storting reached on the previous Government’s white paper on the High North. But we wish to go a few steps further, to widen the perspective, highlight the fact that this is a joint responsibility and stake out the course for the future.

When we look at our neighbouring areas, we see that the greatest changes are taking place in the north. This is where the context is changing, where we and others are redefining our viewpoints and interests.

The Government will respond by developing a comprehensive, cross-sectoral policy which will take into account the links between economic opportunities, environmental challenges and the responsibilities and obligations involved in resource management.

The Government’s efforts in the High North will be based on developing knowledge, maintaining a Norwegian presence and taking active part in developments.

Our ambition is to be at the cutting edge in all areas of knowledge relevant to the north – in fisheries, energy, the environment, climate, the Law of the Sea, resource management, indigenous rights and cultural cooperation.

We are making progress, but we intend to go further. Technology can make it possible to strike a balance between industrial activity and environmental concerns. We have decided to launch the research and development programme Barents 2020 to stimulate research and development and fill gaps in our knowledge, particularly in the fields of energy and the environment.

We must be willing and able to maintain a presence.

It is only by maintaining a presence at sea and on land that we can build up our knowledge and set standards. Other countries can be expected to increase the level of activity, particularly in the energy and transport sectors. We must therefore have the capacity to maintain a presence and exercise our responsibilities as a coastal state. The Coast Guard has been given more resources. This will give Orion surveillance planes more flying time. We will ensure that the Norwegian defence forces maintain a visible presence in the north, and we must constantly assess needs and capacity.

By taking active part in developments we will maintain our sovereignty, develop knowledge, and bolster our presence. By being at the forefront in the management of the most important resources in the region we can ensure that we fulfil our responsibility as a coastal state. We are already at the forefront in the fisheries sector. We must also be at the forefront in the energy sector, within the strict environmental and safety framework we will establish. And we must be at the cutting edge in research and development in the polar regions.

We will keep a high profile in the regional forums in which we participate: the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers, the Arctic Council, the Barents cooperation and the Baltic Sea cooperation. And we will strive to influence the development of the EU Northern Dimension. The Finish EU chairmanship in the second half of 2006 will provide us with a particularly good opportunity to do so.

Mr President,

The energy dimension is changing the perspective in the High North. This applies to us, to our Russian neighbours and to all those for whom energy production, supply security and global climate and environmental challenges are important concerns. The gas conflict between Russia and Ukraine was a reminder of the vulnerability of the European energy supply systems. The US too was reminded of the importance of stable supplies and alternative sources of supply by the drop in petroleum production following the hurricanes last autumn.

As a result the world is looking towards the north. The Barents Sea may become Europe’s most important petroleum province. We are prepared for greater interest from governments and companies. LNG technology makes it possible to transport gas without being dependent on pipelines. In a year’s time the first LNG carrier will leave the Snøhvit field bound for the US East Coast. Growing demand for LNG in the US market is crucial to the viability of the planned Shtokman field in the Russian part of the Barents Sea.

These developments have implications for Europe as a whole. As gas production further south on the Norwegian shelf diminishes, there will be spare capacity in the pipeline network. This network can be extended northwards if sufficient resources are found. We wish to involve our European partners in a dialogue on the High North. And they are interested in a dialogue with us because they have obvious interests in the development of the new energy chapter that is now opening in Europe.

We must have a say in defining the terms for the development of the petroleum resources in the Barents Sea. We are taking the lead with the Snøhvit field, which will be the first producing field in the Barents Sea.

It is equally important for Norway to be as closely involved as possible in developments on the Russian shelf. President Putin has invited Norway to take part in a strategic energy partnership with Russia in the High North. It is an invitation we are pleased to accept, and we will take a similarly open approach towards the Russians. Norwegian companies should be well qualified to participate in Russian development projects and it should also be possible for Russian companies to take part in Norwegian developments. Cooperation with Norwegian companies will give the Russians access to state-of-the-art technology developed by well-run companies with head offices in a familiar neighbouring country.

Statoil and Hydro are among the five companies that have been shortlisted by the Russians as potential cooperation partners in the development of the Shtokman field. The Government is supporting the two companies and has made this clear in its regular contact with the Russian authorities. The Minister of Petroleum and Energy reiterated this at the end of January, I will do so in Moscow next week, and so will the Prime Minister when he meets his Russian counterpart in March.

The Government wishes to set the standard for petroleum activities in the Barents Sea. And not only for the Norwegian part. Our ambition is to ensure environmental and management standards that are high enough to safeguard this vulnerable environment.

We must ensure that the Barents Sea continues to be one of the most unspoilt areas in the world, one of the world’s cleanest seas and home to some of the world’s richest fish stocks. This is why the petroleum industry in the Barents Sea must meet the highest environmental and safety standards in the world.

The Norwegian management plan that is being drawn up will therefore be a reference document, particularly because it will be cross-sectoral and will create a good framework for fisheries, energy and transport-related activities.

Our contact with the Russians has confirmed that both parties wish to engage in broad-based cooperation to safeguard the vulnerable marine environment and the valuable fish stocks. However several incidents have shown that dealing with environmental crime is a major challenge, raising issues in relation to both the exercise of Norway’s jurisdiction and the bilateral fisheries management regime.

The main task is to intensify our cooperation on combating the extensive illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in the Barents Sea. Norway and Russia have a common interest in preventing overfishing and illegal fishing. We will cooperate closely with Russia on this, and will take steps to deal with unregistered trade in illegally caught fish in European ports. We are also inviting the EU to take part in a dialogue on this problem. It is quite clear that the EU is not interested in helping criminals to sell their goods.

Mr President,

Norway’s relations with Russia have been developing, and are now more extensive than ever before. I am pleased that we have such a fruitful political dialogue. There is an active exchange of visits in most areas of society. The Government is currently drawing up an action plan for our relations with Russia, and we aim to present this during Prime Minister Fradkov’s visit to Norway next month.

We enjoy good neighbourly relations with Russia, and the benefits are particularly obvious in the northernmost part of our country. However, the seizure of Russian vessels in the fisheries protection zone around Svalbard and the Russian ban on imports of Norwegian fresh fish that was introduced on 1 January this year both show clearly that there are still challenges to be met.

There are also other issues that need to be dealt with in Russia, for instance the conditions under which NGOs and the media are working. These must be improved if the country is to develop a greater degree of pluralism and democracy. Russia still has a long way to go before it becomes a predictable and democratic state governed by the rule of law.

The ban on imports of fresh fish is a serious blow to the trade between our two countries. Demand has been strong, and the total value of sales of fresh and frozen fish increased to NOK 3.7 billion in 2005. Participation in the Russian market offers great opportunities but also involves complex problems. Solving these problems will require long-term efforts by the Norwegian business sector and the authorities. The Government is using a number of channels, including the veterinary authorities and political channels, in its efforts to have the import ban lifted. We have observed that other countries are experiencing similar problems in their trade with Russia. Finding a solution will require patience, clear communication and a professional approach to our Russian counterparts.

The discussions with Russia on the delimitation of the continental shelf and the 200-mile zones in the Barents Sea have been resumed. A round of talks between senior officials was held in December last year, and the talks will be continued this year. Between 2003 and last December there was a break in the discussions, while we waited for political clarification from the Russians.

The tone of the talks is constructive, and valuable work is being done. I myself have an open and direct dialogue with my Russian colleague on these matters. During my visit to Moscow next week, we will continue our talks and will discuss both opportunities and challenges in our bilateral relations.

I would like to conclude my review of the High North by referring back to my introductory remarks on the three main tracks of Norway’s foreign policy.

In the High North we clearly see the importance of a systematic approach to developing a legal system based on rules that are recognised by everyone, on the exercise of responsibility and sovereignty by coastal states, and on willingness and ability to resolve outstanding questions in a proper and correct manner.

We are confident that we are meeting our responsibility as coastal state. There is a sound basis in international law for our exercise of sovereignty in the Barents Sea and around Svalbard. We take a consistent approach to our stewardship of these waters, and we are participating in charting the continental shelf to determine how far it extends to the north.

We see the importance of keeping in close contact with our neighbours, friends and other interested parties. Now that more attention is being focused on the north, we intend to take a proactive approach and conduct High North dialogues with our neighbours and our European and American partners.

Others are still evolving their views on the High North. We should regard any view, any strategy that has not been fully developed as an opportunity for Norway. As a responsible coastal state with a long-term perspective, our approach to the High North is predictable.

Mr President,

The overall goal of the Government’s European policy is to work towards a more equitable, safer and better organised Europe.

This Government will not apply for EU membership. We will cooperate with the EU on the basis of the EEA Agreement, through participation in various agencies, through the Schengen agreement, through cooperation on foreign and security policy and through agreements in other areas such as research and culture. The Government is now reviewing experience of the functioning of the EEA and Schengen agreements. We will also maintain a strong profile in the OSCE and the Council of Europe and we will play an active role in the Nordic Council and in the Council of Ministers, where Norway holds the chairmanship this year.

We benefit from common rules and standards for the European market. We will safeguard the agreements that ensure equal conditions for Norwegian companies and employees.

The Government intends to pursue a proactive European policy. We must focus more closely on what is important to us, where we can make a difference and where we can make a contribution, take a share of the responsibility and thus promote our national interests and views. Many of the challenges the EU is facing are challenges that we also have to face.

In the course of the spring the Government will draw up an action plan that will enable us to implement a proactive, clear and open European policy. This will be based on a three-pronged strategy. Firstly, setting clear and timely political priorities. Secondly, focusing and streamlining our efforts and making the best possible use of the opportunities we have to exert an influence. And thirdly, taking a constructive approach to our obligations.

We will step up efforts to provide information, improve the reporting and publication of information on EU issues and raise the level of knowledge about the EU and the EEA in the public administration. In consultation with the Storting, we will try to make it possible for important EU and EEA matters to be discussed in the Storting at an earlier stage.

Through the EEA Financial Mechanisms, Norway is taking a share of the responsibility for social and economic development in the Baltic states and in Central Europe. During the five-year period from 2004 to 2009, more than NOK 9 billion will be made available for development projects. This large contribution will add an important new dimension to our cooperation with these countries. This is something we should take advantage of in our European policy and bilateral relations with these countries.

The EU agenda includes issues where Norway has special expertise. Energy policy and energy supply security are now among the topmost concerns. Norway supplied about one quarter of the gas consumed by the EU in 2003. Currently the EU imports roughly half of the energy it consumes, and it is estimated that by 2030 this share will have increased to 70 per cent.

The Government will give priority to further developing the energy policy dialogue with the EU. We will maintain close contact with the EU and with the Russian G8 chairmanship ahead of the G8 summit in St. Petersburg this summer. In this context there are close links between the Government’s High North policy and its European policy.

The EU is much the largest export market for Norway’s fish, but we have repeatedly found that the framework for our exports to the EU is not good enough. For more than 15 years, we have had to put up with restrictions or threats of restrictions on our salmon exports to the EU. Just two weeks ago, the EU decided to impose antidumping measures on Norwegian salmon. In our opinion, there is no basis in the WTO rules for this decision. We have therefore decided that we will, if necessary, take the matter up in the WTO. However, we will not do so until we have tried every possible approach to find an amicable solution. Our goal is to ensure a stable framework for the Norwegian fish farming industry.

The salmon issue shows that the current trade policy situation leaves us in a vulnerable position. We are involved in a dispute with the EU. We are shut out of the US market. This underscores how important it is to reach agreement on stricter rules to prevent antidumping measures being imposed too easily. It is hardly surprising that this is one of Norway’s priorities in the ongoing WTO negotiations.

Mr President,

The WTO Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong in December showed that the negotiations are going forwards. Some modest progress was made. But just as important was the fact that ministers from 149 countries were able to reach agreement. This proves that this multilateral negotiation system is still intact. The alternative to multilateral agreements negotiated through the WTO is a plethora of bilateral agreements or no agreements at all. Either of these would be likely to result in the domination of the weak by the strong, and the developing countries would not improve their market access.

In Hong Kong, agreement was reached on eliminating all export subsidies by the end of 2013. It was agreed that the industrialised countries, and those developing countries that are in a position to do so, will grant quota- and duty-free access for most goods from the least developed countries. As you know, Norway has already done this.

The developing countries also gained acceptance for their demand that market access for their agricultural and industrial goods should be a key element of the Development Round, and that the level of ambition for agricultural products and industrial products including fish should be comparably high. In addition, a number of countries pledged to provide more trade-related assistance.

The Ministerial Conference strengthened the impression that although the developing countries are not a homogenous group, they are able to rally behind common demands at important junctures. We have not seen this before in international negotiations. They are demanding their fair share of world trade, particularly in the field of agriculture. The developing countries now hold the key to agreement in more and more areas.

Improved market access is a positive and equitable development, and one the Government welcomes and intends to promote, as indeed we did in Hong Kong. In the fight against poverty, access to trade and markets is one of the main avenues for development. Securing poor countries’ access to trade is an important step towards fairer distribution of goods in the world.

At the same time we must realise that this will pose a challenge to Norway and other rich countries, particularly when developing countries require market access in the one area where there have been high tariff rates and high levels of domestic support, namely agriculture.

The situation is still as I described it in my address on 9 December last year. If an agreement is reached, Norwegian agriculture will be facing major challenges. Considerable structural adaptation will be required. The Government is working towards arrangements that will make it possible to maintain agriculture in all parts of the country, in line with the Government’s policy platform. We are not alone, and we will do everything we can to ensure the best possible result.

The Government’s aim is to contribute to the successful conclusion of the Doha Round. We will work actively to achieve ambitious results in the negotiations on services and industrial products, including fish, and to improve antidumping rules.

The time schedule ahead is tight. Important questions in the fields of agriculture and industrial products including fish must be resolved by the end of April. The round is scheduled to be concluded by the end of 2006. We will do our part. But the member states of the WTO are facing a very difficult task.

Mr President,

In recent years, Norway has organised its efforts in Africa through bilateral cooperation with a number of countries. It is now time to take a new strategic approach that encompasses the whole continent. Norway needs a renewed Africa policy that takes into account the links between development policy and foreign policy.

Despite many positive developments, Africa is facing enormous challenges that will require significant efforts both by the continent itself and by the international community. The poverty crisis is deepest in Africa. There are major problems in Africa but also opportunities. Africa has a responsibility. But we also have a responsibility. This is a guiding principle for Norwegian development policy. It should also guide our foreign policy.

Face to face with Africa’s challenges – and opportunities, even major powers can feel powerless. For a long time, the former colonial powers dominated in Africa, and during the Cold War, the rivalry between the two superpowers spilled over into Africa. Now new patterns are emerging. Many countries are redefining their policies. China’s strong involvement, especially in the energy sector, is a good example.

Solving Africa’s problems will require better organised and better coordinated international cooperation. Africa was at the top of the G8 agenda at the Gleneagles summit last year. This led to a plan being drawn up for writing off the debts of a number of poor African countries – an initiative that Norway also supported. It is encouraging that the African countries, through the African Union (AU) and the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD), have developed their own strategies for dealing with the challenges facing the continent.

There are also positive developments in Africa. The number of armed conflicts has fallen. More and more countries are holding democratic elections, and several regions are experiencing some economic growth.

Africa is becoming an important supplier of crude oil. It is estimated that 25 per cent of US imports will be from West Africa by 2010. China and India are also showing growing interest in continent. This is leading to a new security situation both for Africa as a whole and for the African countries that are producers of raw materials.

The African Union is an example of how African countries are seeking African solutions to their problems. Although much remain to be done before the AU finds the right form for cooperation between its members, its efforts to strengthen African efforts in crisis resolution have been significant.

This has been particularly apparent in the efforts undertaken by the AU in Darfur and in its role in leading the negotiations on a political solution to this tragic conflict. Norway will continue to support these efforts. We have provided assistance for both these undertakings and are considering contributing to the UN peacekeeping force that is being prepared.

We will cooperate closely with the countries and institutions involved to ensure a peaceful solution in Darfur and implement the Sudan peace agreement. Through their joint efforts in Darfur, organisations such as the UN, NATO, the EU and the AU have developed a form of cooperation that will be important to maintain. The Norwegian Embassy in Addis Ababa has been acting as a coordination point between NATO and the AU since last summer, and has thus facilitated cooperation on the situation in Darfur between these two organisations.

It is important to expand this cooperation to include other issues. We must seek foreign policy cooperation with African countries and institutions on both African and international issues. We are meeting African countries in new key roles in international cooperation – for example in the WTO negotiations – as important oil-exporting countries and as active players in efforts to resolve serious conflicts. We are interested in close contact with African countries on these and other issues.

We will play an active part vis-à-vis the UN, the World Bank and other donors to ensure a coherent approach and effective coordination so that international efforts in Africa produce the best possible results. We believe the Oil-for-Development programme will be very valuable in this connection. It will make Norwegian expertise available for African and other countries in their efforts to ensure that the income from petroleum operations is used to benefit society as a whole.

Our vision is an African continent free of conflicts, where people can build a future for themselves in peace. In the next few months, the Government will invite Norwegian centres of excellence to a brainstorming session on Norwegian foreign policy priorities as regards Africa. Here, as elsewhere, we must have a clear focus, set priorities and channel our resources where they will add value to the overall international efforts.

Mr President,

After the Second World War there was extensive renewal of the international system. The UN and the UN Charter, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the four Geneva Conventions set universal standards. The establishment of NATO and later the EC set important guiding principles for cooperation and security in Europe, as did the CSCE, which later became the OSCE.

We have to look for new ways of organising international cooperation. We need stronger patterns of cooperation at both global and regional level, for example in the broader Middle East. We need to strengthen dialogue. We have to deal with individual issues, many of which involve critical situations that require crisis management. But we must also find room for discussing new forms of cooperation that can provide countries and regions with a framework for security, trade and cultural and academic exchange. We will not achieve peace and security in the Middle East unless we take a broader view. At present there is the misconception that security on one side means insecurity on the other. This must be corrected, just as Europe has broken out of a similar situation.

Norway will play an active role in UN reform. We will support the UN agencies. We will seek to ensure that these agencies, which represent all the countries of the world, play a key role in the efforts we make to meet the challenges facing the world community – whether we are fighting against human trafficking or against the proliferation of nuclear weapons, striving to provide health care and education for all or building up the emergency response system to meet a global threat like avian flu.

We must also safeguard international law and standards – our hard-won common goods. Those who claim that the provisions of international humanitarian law and the UN Charter on the use of power are not adequate to deal with new security threats – such as terrorism – are staking out a dangerous path.

The message from the UN 2005 World Summit was crystal clear, reaffirming that, “the relevant provisions of the Charter are sufficient to address the full range of threats to international peace and security.”

The fight against terrorism must be waged with determination and it must be based on the principles of international law. The perpetrators of terrorist acts must be caught and brought to trial. The authorities in the countries involved must cooperate closely. Norway is taking part in this cooperation.

Certain aspects of US treatment of prisoners have given grounds for concern, and we have raised this matter with the US authorities. This does not only apply to US practice, it also applies to the treatment of prisoners in a number of other countries and situations.

No conflict, whether national or international, justifies depriving prisoners of proper protection and their fundamental rights. As a minimum, all prisoners must be humanely treated at all times, regardless of their status. And even if a prisoner’s status is unclear, this cannot be used as a justification for depriving him or her of the fundamental right to protection. The very idea that fundamental rights can be set aside in the fight against terrorism will, in the long term, have the opposite effect from what is intended – it will weaken rather than strengthen the fight against terrorism.

One of the most dangerous aspects of terrorism is the way it can lead to polarisation and antagonism. We must fight against crime by means of fair trials and proper defence. Extremist attitudes must be counteracted through economic and social development, through democracy, dialogue and negotiation. The current situation clearly illustrates this point.

Norway will seize the opportunities it has to promote peace and reconciliation. We should not aim to take part in too many processes, but we will follow-up the processes we are involved in.

This is what I was referring to earlier when I was talking about the third track of our foreign policy. Norway does not go solo in its peace efforts. One of our strengths is the fact that we have close ties with the US, Canada, the EU and other key players, and a strong position in the UN

Many of the security threats we are facing today – terrorism, cross-border crime, environmental degradation and the spread of diseases – arise in areas of conflict far away from home. But nowhere is “far away from home” on the world map today with its many lines of communication. Fear is spread by video tapes shown on TV. Suicide bombers travel on the Underground. Messages spread right across the world in only seconds. The heroin being sold on our streets comes from villages in Afghanistan.

Norway’s carefully targeted and systematic efforts to help solve some of these conflicts are therefore anchored in solidarity, respect for human dignity and security. If we are to be successful, we must have the opportunity to talk to the parties to a conflict. And this is why the Government decided at the end of last year that while Norway aligns itself with the UN terrorist list, it will not automatically align itself with the EU list.

Our efforts to strengthen human rights take many forms. We want the UN to be strengthened and we want human rights efforts to be one of its core tasks. We are trying to establish bilateral contact, cooperation and dialogues with a number of countries. We are already engaged in human rights dialogues with China, Indonesia and Vietnam, and we are looking into the possibility of a similar dialogue with Iran.

Experience has shown that demonstrating our disagreement in fundamental questions by cutting off contact with the authorities in question only has a limited effect. This is the main reason why the Government has decided to alter its policy, and engage in a dialogue with the Cuban authorities. For a long time we were the only European country that was been cut off from dialogue with Cuba. We will now be in a position to have a critical dialogue and to engage with the whole of civil society in Cuba.

Mr President,

The events of the last few days are closely linked to the broader picture of conflict in the Middle East. I therefore feel it is appropriate to conclude this address where I began – in a region that is the epicentre of so many of today’s conflicts.

The Government takes its responsibility very seriously and will make the most of the opportunities we have to contribute to peaceful, non-violent development. This is why I particularly want to emphasise that the current atmosphere is not going to make us retreat. The great majority do not want violence and confrontation; they want solutions that bring peace, security, justice and development. We are on their side.

The political situation in the Middle East and the framework of the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians have changed radically with the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections two weeks ago and the approaching Israeli elections in March.

The Government respects the results of democratic processes. Together with the international community we promoted a democratic election process. We must therefore respect the result of the election. It is still too early to be sure what kind of government the Palestinians can expect or what policies the new government will follow.

This means that the international community should not set such detailed and absolute demands at this stage that they provoke a refusal to compromise. The new Palestinian government will inevitably need some time to consider its approach.

But we will reiterate Norway’s position: we believe that the conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians must be resolved through negotiations and not through violence. The parties must accept earlier agreements and commitments, including UN resolutions and the road map for peace. We must aim for a two-state solution where Israel and a Palestinian state can live in security within internationally recognised borders. We must make it clear to both parties that this is the course that democratically elected governments must follow. Only then can they expect to have our support and that of the world community.

It is therefore vital that solutions are sought through negotiations and not through unilateral measures. The building of a separation barrier is one such unilateral measure. Norway is maintaining its protest against the building of this separation barrier in the Palestinian area, which we consider to be a violation of international law.

Israel has continued to build settlements around East Jerusalem and on the West Bank, in contravention of the road map for peace and international law. By doing this Israel is systematically tightening its grip on East Jerusalem and splitting up the Palestinian area. This is unacceptable and it is undermining the efforts to find a two-state solution.

At the same time the Israelis are entitled to live in peace and security. This means that the Palestinian Authority and Israel’s other neighbours have a responsibility for preventing and combating the use of violence and terrorism.

Until a new government is formed, the outgoing government will remain in power as a caretaker government under President Mahmoud Abbas. This interim period may last for several months, and it is vital that we maintain our support to prevent the Palestinian institutions from collapsing.

With this in view, Norway maintains a close dialogue with the other donor countries to coordinate our efforts. Talking to my foreign colleagues, I have found that there is widespread agreement that the international community must not fail Mr Abbas and the caretaker government in this interim period.

We play a key role as chair of the Ad-Hoc Liaison Committee for Assistance for the Palestinians (AHLC). We will now intensify our efforts to promote understanding in donor country capitals of the importance of continuing our coordinated international support for Palestinian nation-building. However it is also important that problems in Palestinian society that have contributed to the present poor state of the economy are dealt with.

Mr President,

Developments in all the countries of the Middle East are closely interrelated. Iranian President Ahmadinejad’s diatribe against Israel and his open support for Palestinian armed resistance are thus especially serious and are hampering the peace efforts in the region.

The Iranian nuclear programme also gives cause for concern. Efforts to prevent new countries from gaining access to nuclear weapons are more important than ever. Iran is perfectly entitled to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes. But reasonable suspicions that Iran is planning to enrich uranium for a military nuclear weapons programme are causing concern in many countries. Moreover this would be in direct conflict with Iran’s obligations under the Treaty on Non-proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

This is the reason for the increase in political pressure against Iran as expressed in the resolution passed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on 4 February. The international community is calling on Iran to stop all activities connected to the enrichment of uranium and to give the IAEA full access to its nuclear plants. This also applies to research and development.

There is broad support for the IAEA resolution to report Iran’s nuclear activities to the UN Security Council. The Government considers this to be very important. The five permanent members of the Security Council are in agreement on this matter. I would also like to point out that this resolution takes a broader view, since it stresses the need to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons throughout the region not just within Iran’s borders.

The Government’s view is that strengthening the IAEA’s verification activities in Iran is a key task. The involvement of the Security Council is essential. However, the resolution does not request the Security Council to discuss this matter at present. The IAEA is still in charge. I am pleased that the permanent members of the Security Council also share this view.

It is important that Iran now realises the seriousness of the situation and halts the parts of its nuclear programme that have been called into question. The next step will be for Director General ElBaradei to present a new assessment of Iran’s nuclear programme at the board meeting on 6 March.

We are emphasising the importance of dialogue. We have great respect for the Iranian people, and we would like Iran to take active part in the international community. Isolation is not the way to go. The IAEA resolution paves the way for negotiation. We must strive to follow this path.

Mr President,

It is striking that, in our rapidly changing world, so much of our time is spent dealing with minor issues. At the same time, we are striving to take real action to deal with the major issues, which are the truly existential challenges of our time.

Our greatest challenges are global climate change, which is probably caused by human activity, and the fight against world poverty. These are linked. The effects of climate change will become increasingly obvious in years to come, and could have a severe impact on livelihoods and living conditions throughout the world. The changes seem to be greatest in the polar regions, particularly the Arctic.

But experience shows that yet again it is the poor people of the South who are most severely affected.

The world community is on the way towards achieving several of the Millennium Development Goals, including halving the number of the people living in extreme poverty. Nevertheless, hundreds of millions are living in desperate conditions. More people go hungry today than ten years ago. Many people are denied access to education. The HIV/AIDS epidemic is spreading. And millions have fled their homes.

The world community is striving to find effective means of dealing with these problems. But we do not have adequate mechanisms and tools to do so. Moreover there is a lack of political will. The complexity of the problems makes it difficult to find the solutions that are needed.

We do not have a system of global governance that would enable us to take joint responsibility, distribute burdens equitably and ensure that everyone does their share.

I mention this to underscore the importance of continuing to develop a system of global governance, the importance of working on our own attitudes and engaging with others to strengthen international cooperation and make it more effective.

This too must form part of our foreign policy ambitions. This is too is an area where we must be willing to accept change.