Utenriksministerens innlegg om Nordområdene på Wilton Park

Utenriksministerens innlegg var basert på følgende momenter.
Check against delivery

 

1.         Introductory remarks

• Since my government took office in 2005: High North issues at top of Norway’s foreign policy agenda.
  
  

2.         Perspectives

• Norway’s perspective of the High North. Today this perspective is becoming more and more familiar, as interest in the Arctic region is growing fast. 
• True, the central part of the Arctic is uninhabited, since it is an ocean. But centred around it you find the northern territories of several states, which have been inhabited since the beginning of recorded history. 
• Only a few years ago, even the Arctic states themselves tended to ignore this region, for the simple fact that economic interests and political ambitions drew their attention southwards. 
• Now, the Arctic merits serious consideration also beyond its limits, for ecological, economic and geopolitical reasons. We welcome this. Developments in the Arctic have global ramifications, and global actors have legitimate interests in the region and a valuable contribution to make.
• I will focus on three main aspects:
  
  -          The drivers behind the increased interest in the region – climate change and new sailing routes, petroleum resources, and Russia;
  -          The fundamentals of the legal and political situation in the Arctic, and
  -          The main challenges and opportunities ahead of us, and the special responsibility of the coastal states.
   
• The Arctic has traditionally had a rather mystical allure due to its remoteness and its pristine nature. We must continue to allow ourselves to be moved by its beauty. But at the same time, in the political dimension, we sometimes need to put some facts on the table and correct some common misunderstandings.

 

3.         Key driver 1: Climate change

• Man-made climate change is the greatest challenge facing humanity today.
• We need to work closely together towards the next climate summit in Mexico later this year
• It is important to note that almost all environmental threats in the Arctic originate outside the region (heavy metals etc. in the food chain; nuclear isotopes; black carbon)
• Front row seats: The Arctic is not where the consequences of climate change will be most severely felt, but it is where they are first seen. The region is therefore very important for climate change research
• We encourage international cooperation in this field – more than a dozen nations are engaged in research activities year-round in Ny Ålesund; and we are developing an international centre in Tromsø.

4.         Key driver 2: New sailing routes 

• The melting of the ice is opening up new opportunities for international shipping.
• This map highlights some of the main stake-holders: big economies like China, Japan and Korea, with high import/export volumes. 
• This again illustrates the global character of the economic potential, the fact that the Arctic is and must remain an open region. The legitimate interests of non-Arctic states. 
• An ice free Arctic could shorten distances between the North Atlantic basin and East Asia by about 40 percent. 
• This picture shows a German commercial freighter sailing along Russia’s northern coast last September, escorted by a Russian ice-breaker. A pioneering undertaking. Several logistic, administrative etc. matters to resolve before this becomes an everyday event. 
• But we already see a sharp increase in cruise tourism in the area of Svalbard, with thousands of tourists at any given time in the high season. Challenges: safety of navigation, search and rescue capacity.

 

5.         Key driver 3: Potential for petroleum resources 

• The third driver behind the increased attention is the global interest in petroleum resources. 
• The resources are vast (possibly 24 % of undiscovered resources) and, in technical terms they are becoming more accessible. But investment costs are huge, perhaps prohibitive at present, and prospects are uncertain. 
• Today, no one can say for certain when, and on what scale, development of these resources will take off. Critical factors:
• World demand, world gas prices
• Discoveries in other petroleum provinces, future scale of shale gas extraction, and global LNG supply and capacity
• The pace of development of alternative sources, renewables 
• Stockman: Decision put off again, postponed until next year

           

6.         Key driver 4: Developments in Russia 

• Fourth driver: Russia - after the dissolution of the Soviet Union – finding its place (on global scene)

 

7.         Fundamentals, legal 

• Representatives of all the 5 Arctic coastal states, at Ilulissat, Greenland in 2008. 
• As I have already mentioned: All land in the Arctic belongs to established national states, and these states have the same rights and responsibilities here as elsewhere, in accordance with international law. 
• Between them – an ocean, where the rights and responsibilities of the coastal states extend in accordance with the principles that apply to all seas. 
• The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is fundamental. All states abide by its provisions (including the US, which has not yet ratified the convention) 
• Ilulissat: Coastal states in full agreement on the fundamentals. 
• An orderly process. Example here: The recommendation of the Commission on the Extension of the Continental Shelf with regard to Norway. Questions to be clarified, but no disputes of principle. 
• During last years: Several countries have presented what is commonly referred to as Arctic strategies, or policy documents related to the Arctic. These policy documents are written in somewhat different national contexts. But strikingly, they reveal a fundamentally common approach, emphasising:
• -           The primacy of international law
• -           The need for adequate presence
• -           The need to strike the right balance between
  conservation and development
• -           The necessity of international cooperation
• Norway’s view: it is a good thing that other countries pay attention to the Arctic. Will engage in dialogue with others concerning the approaches we find in these policy documents (e.g. preliminary signals from European Parliament, advocating a Treaty for the Arctic. Now: this idea is abandoned – for reasons I mentioned. Arctic = ocean)

 

8.         Fundamentals, political 

• Well established patters of international cooperation in the Arctic: The Arctic Council, the Barents Council, NEAFC (North East Atlantic Fisheries Commisssion), good-neighbourly bilateral relationships. 
• Russia a key actor, and a responsible actor. Major legitimate interests: “Half of the Arctic”, more than half of the region’s resources (perhaps as much as 70 %), proud scientific traditions. The Arctic an important arena for developing pragmatic cooperation and partnerships between Russia and other states. 
• The Arctic Council:
• The only truly circumpolar organisation, this is vital
• Increasing role, has grown in strength over past 3 years or so; secretariat in Tromsø
• Policy shaping, not decision making
• Main achievements so far: Environment, shipping.
• Topical issue: development of a code for ships operating in polar areas – IMO. I am going there tomorrow
• Common interests of Arctic states – does NOT imply exclusiveness
• All the same: forces of international economic cooperation, globalisation etc. apply here as elsewhere
• Therefore: Norway welcomes new permanent observers, countries with serious interest – as well as the European Commission
• Important to retain the Council as the international arena for global discussions on Arctic issues 
• The Barents Cooperation:
• Established in 1993. Post Cold War. A success story that merits more attention
• Members: Both state-level (BEAC – four states) and regional (BRC – 13 regions/counties) level. This dual level membership a particular component of the Barents cooperation – an institution for and by the people who live there
• The Barents population: approx. 5,5 million people, most of them in Russia. Area: 1,75 million square km     
• Northern Scandinavia and Northwest Russia: by far the most densely populated part of the wider Arctic region. The only place where nations with such different cultures and histories border on each other.
• The Barents agenda:
  -          People-to-people contact
  -          Health and social affairs
  -          Culture
  -          Developing economic ties, integration of science, expertise, labour markets etc.
  -          Environmental issues

 

9.         Successful cooperation based on concrete results 

• Our approach in the Arctic and Barents cooperations has been to i) answer the concrete questions at hand, and ii) to address common challenges together.  Focus on initiatives on the ground, instead of high-profile policy statements in the capitals only. Believe this is a wise and valuable approach.
• On European scene: It is a good thing that different regional bodies and initiatives can meet and exchange views and experiences.
• The sound management of living resources:  a case in point is the common Norwegian-Russian management of the Barents cod; the largest (and best managed) stock of cod in the world, because of sound resource management (will come back to this later).
• Establishing common health, environment and safety standards for future economic activity, not least in the energy sector
• The challenges of vast distances, sparse populations and a harsh climate
• Last but not least: Nuclear safety, environment:
• E.g. The newly completed permanent storage facility for the reactor components of decommissioned submarines at Sayda Bay outside Murmansk. NB: The contribution of the UK, financially and otherwise, to the handling of the remnants from the Cold War in Northwest Russia has been most generous and extremely valuable. 
• Security issues are part of the equation, though in a context of stability and co-operation rather than tension and conflict potential. 
• = High North, low tension

 

10.       Looking ahead: Main challenges and opportunities: 

• Preserve the low tension, a fundamental  concern
• Increased attention to the region is by no means inherently threatening or conducive to conflict.
• Natural and self-evident need to openly, consistently and predictably exercise authority and sovereignty in this region as well.
• This is important to help us avoid or reduce possible security tensions. Military presence and exercises are necessary at a relevant level.
• We need a sober, factual and knowledgeable understanding of the situation to avoid security misunderstandings and misperceptions
• The presence of strategic assets is not due to any regional conflict potential
• The policies and mechanisms that prevail in the region will ensure that co-operation, not confrontation, will continue to characterize the region 
• Special responsibility of coastal states:
• Ensuring sufficient capacities for enforcement
• Necessary in light of future increase in the level of human activity
  o   Create favourable conditions for international cooperation in science and economic development
  o   Develop local communities
  
• Acquisition of necessary capabilities by one state is not harmful to other states, but supportive to the common efforts surveillance, management and predictability. For instance: The EISCAT Svalbard radar installation –which is a common research project including several countries, such as the UK, Norway and China.
• Continue developing necessary international standards, not least for shipping and offshore activities
• Continue developing the institutional framework for cooperation, in particular the Arctic Council 
• Misconceptions that need to be corrected:
• The Arctic is subject to international law in the same way as other regions
• There is no “race for the Arctic”; the fact that one state undertakes an activity does not prevent other states from doing the same, on the contrary. There is no “zero-sum game”.
• The use of both military and civilian assets for civilian tasks, such as search and rescue, is not problematic. Why develop parallel capabilities?
• The region is not characterised by a potential for conflict. On the contrary, it has great potential for peaceful cooperation, based on commonality of interests 
• Focus: Clarity and predictability, openness and inclusiveness, responsibility and cooperation