Norwegian foreign policy in a changing
environment
Pacific Lutheran University, Seattle,
USA
13 April 2004
Check against delivery
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure for me to be
here at Pacific Lutheran University, with its strong Nordic
profile. Ever since the Norwegian minister Bjug Harstad founded the
University more than 100 years ago, it has fostered close relations
with Norway. The Scandinavian Cultural Center plays a particularly
important role in this regard.
Fresh thinking has always been one
of the trademarks of this institution. By introducing your
programme on Nordic Approaches to Peace, Democracy, and
Development, you are continuing in that great tradition.
I welcome the opportunity the
programme provides to study the way democracy is practiced in
Norway. This includes our philosophy and approach towards aid to
developing countries and our participation in peace mediation and
conflict resolution. The participation of the University of Namibia
in this programme is crucial for understanding the issues from the
point of view of a developing country.
I hope that many students from the
PLU will take advantage of the opportunity to learn about the
Norwegian approach through the semester programme offered at
Hedmark University College.
It is programmes like these that
ensure that the long-standing ties between Norway and the United
States will remain as strong in the future as they have been in the
past. To achieve this we need to promote and nurture
people-to-people contacts. The Norwegian-American community is an
immense resource to that end. We are grateful to have such a large
and influential group of supporters here on the West Coast of the
United States.
My visit here is an expression of
the political significance I attach to forging the bonds between
our two countries, and to personally meet with those Americans who
have a relationship to Norway, and who share my interest in strong
Norwegian-American ties.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The aim of Norwegian foreign policy
is both to safeguard national interests – directly and indirectly –
and to fulfill our shared political and moral obligations. The one
does not exclude the other.
The close and warm relationship
between the US and Norway is built on the fact that we subscribe to
the same basic values. We share a clear commitment to freedom,
democracy and human rights, good governance and the rule of law,
and a market economy.
A small country like Norway can
only safeguard its security and its national interests through
multilateral co-operation. We therefore seek multilateral solutions
wherever possible and will continue to provide ideas, military and
civilian resources, and humanitarian and economic support for such
joint endeavours. We will remain strongly committed to the UN. And
we will continue to do what we can to strengthen the transatlantic
ties - first and foremost in the North Atlantic Alliance -
NATO.
To be successful in promoting
national interests you have to be visible, you have to be heard.
During the Cold War era, Norway was in a vulnerable and
strategically important geographical position, due to our common
border with the Soviet Union. But, we knew we could always count on
the support from our Allies and close friends.
Now, the situation has changed
radically. The Soviet Union does no longer exist. We are a
privileged nation in one of the most peaceful corners of the
world.
But, our need for good, responsive
partners has not diminished. On the contrary, time and time again
we have experienced that networking is absolutely necessary in
order to attract attention to our national interests.
Partnership is both about giving
and taking. If we wish support from our partners, we must be
prepared to contribute in areas where they need our backing. We
must demonstrate that Norway stands ready to support its close
friends and allies, and that we are a useful and valuable
co-operation partner.
We must also be willing to make
concrete contributions to resolving the common problems we are
facing, both by providing military resources and by showing the
political will to take responsibility in an emergency. This
responsibility no longer applies only to Europe. Global threats are
accompanied by a global responsibility, also for us.
Our involvement in peace processes,
our participation in peacekeeping and stabilization operations, our
efforts to promote human rights, and our extensive humanitarian
efforts and development co-operation can partly be viewed in this
perspective. Our contributions – and our strong support for the UN
– reflect Norway’s determination to take responsibility. But, the
efforts to achieve a world based on binding international
co-operation, international law and freedom from want and strife
are clearly in our own self-interest.
The present threats and challenges
are of a global nature. Security is indivisible. International
engagement is an investment in our own security.
Moreover, our contributions to
international efforts reflect the conviction that if we can help
other people to achieve a more secure, more decent life, we quite
simply have an obligation to do so. Sixty thousand people have been
killed in the conflict in Sri Lanka. If Norway’s efforts can make a
difference to the situation there, that is of course a good enough
reason to be involved.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The tasks facing the international
community are daunting. The thaw in East-West relations was
unfortunately accompanied by a thaw in the many ethnic and local
conflicts that had been frozen during the Cold War. The result was
all too often regional conflicts, increased poverty, corruption,
organized crime, and illegal trafficking in human beings, weapons
and drugs.
Such environments provide fertile
ground for the recruitment of terrorists, and for a black market
economy that finances their activities. This is part of the reason
why international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction have become the defining threats to international
peace and security.
International law, the United
Nations Charter and the resolutions of the UN Security Council
should be the foundation of our efforts to achieve peace, security
and stability. We need the broadest possible coalition to
effectively address the most pressing security challenges. With its
universal membership and broad range of instruments, the UN is the
most suitable organization for concerted action by the
international community.
The threats and risks to
international peace and stability have changed since the UN Charter
was drafted. There is a need for reform of the UN in order to adapt
to the new situation. We look forward to the report of the High
Level Panel that the UN Secretary General has appointed to explore
how the UN could meet the new security threats and challenges.
While looking forward, the Panel should also draw on experiences
from earlier activities. The UN cannot afford repeating the
mistakes of its Bosnia operations in the 1990s. We cannot afford
another Srebrenica
Ladies and gentlemen,
Our participation in the North
Atlantic Alliance is a cornerstone for Norwegian security. The
transatlantic ties are also vital to our success in countering
international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction.
Norway will do its utmost to ensure
that coming generations will continue to enjoy the same sense of
security and solidarity provided by the transatlantic ties that we
have largely come to take for granted. We want NATO to continue to
safeguard the security of all its members.
Transatlantic tensions are nothing
new. We have seen them before. Kyoto, the International Criminal
Court and the Test Ban Treaty are just a few of the most recent
examples.
Today’s situation, however, is
cause for greater concern. The differences of opinion across the
Atlantic are greater in number than before, and they go deeper. And
they reflect very divergent attitudes to international
co-operation.
It is essential that NATO continues
to be the most important forum for transatlantic dialogue on
security issues. But then we will have to examine within NATO what
we can do to bring the European and the American view of the world
and possible course of action closer together. NATO must continue
adapting to the new situation to be relevant.
The differences over Iraq between
members of the Western Alliance are now largely behind us. I am
confident that the NATO summit in June in Istanbul will confirm the
strength of our transatlantic ties.
The Alliance has already taken on a
heavy responsibility in Afghanistan through its leadership of the
International Security and Assistance Force - ISAF. This is the
first time NATO is involved outside the Euro-Atlantic area. In this
sense Afghanistan is a credibility test – and it is a tough one. We
simply cannot afford to fail. It will also have a significant
impact on the further development of NATO, as we must be prepared
for a long-lasting engagement. Therefore, Afghanistan must be a top
priority for the Alliance.
Afghanistan is at a critical
juncture. The difficult security situation and the drug-related
economy pose a significant threat to the political and economic
development of the entire region. The elections next September will
be a milestone, as they provide an opportunity to form a fully
representative government in Kabul. ISAF must, to the extent
possible, contribute to providing the necessary security for
carrying out the elections.
Norway is committed to a broad and
long-term engagement in Afghanistan. Our military contribution to
ISAF will continue. As part of this, we will participate in the
Provincial Reconstruction Teams that will be established outside
Kabul this year.
This month we will also be sending
a group of police instructors to Afghanistan, who will assist in
building up and training an Afghan police and border police
force.
We have recently upgraded
Afghanistan’s status to be one of our designated partner countries
in development co-operation. This means an increase in long-term
development assistance to the country. Our political commitment to
Afghanistan clearly is for the long haul.
There is an important lesson here:
"There is no development and reconstruction without security, and
there is no security without development and reconstruction." To my
mind, the case of Afghanistan clearly shows that, in certain
situations, the use of military means is indispensable for building
peace and stability.
NATO may also be called upon to
take on a stronger role in the stabilization of Iraq. As in
Afghanistan, improved security is the key. Norway is currently
participating in the stabilization force. We also believe that the
UN needs to play a more prominent role in Iraq. Only the UN can
give the political process the necessary legitimacy.
We also have unfinished business on
the European continent. Norway has contributed substantively to the
NATO-led military presence in the Balkans – first in Bosnia, then
in Kosovo. We have also contributed to the military presence in
Macedonia – first under the leadership of NATO, and later under the
leadership of the EU. And, we will participate when the EU takes
over command of the military presence in Bosnia from NATO.
Norway fully supports the aim of
the EU to develop and implement a European security and defense
policy – the ESDP. We consider it vital that the ESDP is developed
in close co-operation with NATO.
A close partnership between the EU
and NATO is essential in order to ensure confidence and
co-operation across the Atlantic. I am convinced that increased
co-operation and a sensible division of labour between NATO and the
EU will strengthen the security of all allies. It will enable NATO
to focus its resources more efficiently on the new security
threats.
Most of the security problems we
faced in the past had their roots on the European continent. Today
the roots of the most pressing threats to our security are found in
what is increasingly referred to as the Greater Middle East. There
is a need for democratic reforms in this area. Reform efforts will
no doubt be met with resistance by many. There is no lack of
skeptical voices. But I am also convinced that support for reform
is stronger than ever – and growing. In order to move the process
forward, we must now demonstrate inclusiveness and work to generate
the ownership of the countries concerned.
In view of the recent developments
in the Middle East there is an urgent need for concerted action.
The international community must make use of all the instruments at
its disposal to support the peace efforts between Israel and the
Palestinians. The members of the Quartet - the UN, the EU, Russia
and particularly the US – carry a special responsibility in this
regard. If requested by the parties, NATO should be prepared to
consider a role for securing a peace agreement.
A solution to the conflict between
the Israelis and the Palestinians would have a huge, positive
impact on other problems in the region. On the other hand,
resolving other problems in this part of the world is not
necessarily dependent on a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict. NATO and the EU – with its broad set of instruments –
should offer to assist in such endeavours. However, that would
require the two organizations to develop a co-ordinated and
mutually supportive approach.
Ladies and gentlemen,
As you may know Norway gained
valuable experience as a facilitator of the peace talks that led up
to the Oslo accords between Israel and the Palestinians. One of the
most important lessons we learned from this process is that success
is contingent on trust between the parties, and that cease-fire
agreements must be independently monitored.
We have applied these and other
lessons when we have been requested to mediate between conflicting
parties elsewhere in the world. As you may be aware, such requests
have come from Latin America, the Horn of Africa, Sri Lanka and
other parts of Asia.
Why Norway, you might ask? To
explain our participation in these processes, I would like to
emphasize three factors in particular.
First, Norway’s role as a peace
facilitator is in many ways a continuation of our long-standing
commitment to peace through humanitarian action and development
co-operation. Most Norwegians share the conviction that we have a
moral responsibility to help alleviate poverty and conflicts
wherever we can.
Second, as a small country with no
colonial past and few vested interests, we are considered a neutral
and impartial broker. We have no second agendas.
Third, our government co-operates
closely with Norwegian non-governmental organizations. Norwegian
NGOs have gained valuable experience through activities in
different parts of the world for several decades. And perhaps even
more important, their idealistic approach has earned them a
reputation as highly professional and dedicated to helping others.
Therefore we have good networks and hands-on knowledge of the
various regions.
A common denominator for many of
the peace processes in which we have been involved has been the
interaction between diplomatic and humanitarian assistance, and
between government and non-state actors. This is a recipe that has
proven to be quite successful.
Let me give you a few concrete
examples. For the past five years Norway has been involved in
facilitating talks between the conflicting parties in Sri Lanka.
The government of Sri Lanka and the Tamil Tigers have been at war
for at least 20 years. Our role has been to assist the parties in
their efforts to reach a political solution, not to impose a
solution on them. The peace process has made substantial progress
since the two parties entered into a cease-fire agreement in
February 2002. The parties have agreed on the basic principles of a
political solution, and are now working on the practical details.
Two years of cease-fire, and active involvement from donors, have
given the people of Sri Lanka a real peace dividend. They clearly
do not want renewed hostilities. This shows the importance of
backing peace-efforts with development assistance and financial
contributions.
Peace facilitation is, however, a
cumbersome process that requires patience. Maintaining the
cease-fire is part of the key to success. Therefore an independent
monitoring mission has been established. The Sri Lanka Monitoring
Mission is led by Norway and includes observers from the five
Nordic countries. The aim of this mission is to make independent
rulings on alleged violations of the cease-fire. These monitoring
activities help build trust between the parties.
Just to underline my point that
patience may be the most important ingredient of a successful
process, the peace talks are now on hold due to various internal
developments. However, all parties have expressed their willingness
to restart talks following the parliamentary elections that were
held on the 2
nd> of April. The parties hope to resume talks on an
interim arrangement, while continuing their search for a lasting
settlement.
We are also involved in the peace
process in Sudan, which grew out of our long-standing humanitarian
assistance to the country and the work of Norwegian NGOs in this
region. This engagement brought us in contact with both parties to
the conflict, which goes back 20 years. In facilitating
communication between the parties, we were gradually trusted as an
"honest broker". In September last year the parties agreed on the
principles for resolving the sensitive issues related to security
arrangements for a peace agreement. In February this year peace
talks were resumed and the parties are now in the final stages of
the talks.
Peace in Sudan would end one of
Africa’s longest lasting conflicts. Two million people have been
killed and more than four million have become refugees over the
last twenty years. A peace agreement is long overdue, both for the
people of Sudan and for the region as a whole. Putting an end to
the human suffering will, however, require broad international
engagement; also after a peace agreement has been signed. Economic
development will be vital for sustaining peace and stability.
Norway has therefore offered to host a donor conference once a
peace agreement is signed.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Successful mediation is only
possible if both parties have a genuine will for peace. Success as
a mediator also requires that we have a clear notion of our own
role, and a clear notion of the role of other international actors.
We need to take a common approach and act in a mutually supportive
way. And last but no least, it is important to remember that every
conflict has its own dynamics. The role of third-party facilitator
needs to be carefully tailored to the situation at hand, and based
on close dialogue with the parties concerned.
Ladies and gentlemen,
There is, more than ever, a need
for co-ordinated efforts by the international community, whether
addressing threats of international terrorism and proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction, or regional and local conflicts. We
must make full use of the UN, NATO, the EU and other international
organizations in meeting these threats.
In a changing foreign policy
environment, I am confident that close transatlantic ties will
continue to be as important as ever in meeting the security
challenges of the 21
st> century. Norway will continue to work hard to
reinforce our ties across the Atlantic.
Thank you for your attention.
