Enlargement eastwards of the EU and NATO

Mr. Bjørn Tore Godal
Minister of Foreign Affairs

Enlargement eastwards of the EU and NATO

EUROPAFORUM Conference,
Oslo, 28 October 1995

I am pleased to have this opportunity to address you on some important issues related to the future development of European cooperation. Norway voted No to EU membership in the Referendum last November, but we did not vote ourselves out of Europe or all-European cooperation. Membership is not on the Government's agenda, but we must continuously assess the consequences for Norway of the changes in European cooperation. It is important that we conduct a broad debate on European issues in Norway as well. This seminar provides an excellent opportunity for further reflection and closer study of the many different aspects of European integration that will be on Europe's agenda, including our own, in the years to come.

We must never lose sight of the fact that Europe is a patchwork of different nation states, ethnic groups, languages, religions and cultures. Throughout history, alliances have shifted following the rivalries between the great European powers. The fundamental achievement of Western Europe and North America after the Second World War was the common experience that peace and stability on the European continent must be built on integration and cooperation. NATO has successfully protected Western Europe from the threat of war. The European Union has contributed to the integration of the economic and political life of the member states to the degree that war between them is unthinkable. EFTA and the EEA have also made contributions to the same effect.

We realise today more than ever that the interests that bind us together in Europe have become far greater than the differences that divided us for decades. European cooperation cannot be built on confrontation and the "balance of power", but must be based on solidarity between nations and peoples. We have to join forces to prevent ancient competing interests of individual nation states from putting at risk what we so remarkably have achieved in Europe. Real national interests are best served by cooperation and integration to meet challenges which transcend national borders.

The end of the Cold War has given us a historic opportunity to unite Europe in a pattern of mutual cooperation and trust. Our greatest single task for the rest of this century is gradually to expand to the East of our continent the political and economic stability which we take for granted in the West, while recognising that Central and Eastern European countries have important cultural and social contributions to make. In the formation of a Europe of cooperation and integration across former dividing lines, we should make use of a broad range of measures and instruments, involving all European and transatlantic institutions. Two parallel paths should be followed: The new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe have to be integrated into a general framework of cooperation, and security in Europe has to include Russia while maintaining a strong transatlantic relationship.

While Nato's efforts are primarily related to security and defence policy, EU cooperation has a broader focus in political and economic terms. Strengthening the political and economic ties between European countries is the best way of creating a more stable political climate in Europe. In this process the European Union has become the key institution for European cooperation and should play a leading role in the further development of democracy and prosperity on our continent. We have today a unique opportunity to establish cooperation across a Europe governed by the rule of law, where problems are solved at the negotiating table and where compromises are found in cooperation between several parties.

Membership in the European Union is of fundamental importance to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. They demand political attention for their problems, market access for their products and assistance for further political and economic reform. This is an opportunity to tie them firmly into the democratic family of nations that should be utilized. It is in Norway's interest that the new democracies in Europe be gradually drawn into EU cooperation and ultimately become members.

Although accession to the EU necessarily lies several years ahead, negotiations on enlargement should start as soon as possible after the conclusion of the EU Intergovernmental Conference, and at the same time for all associated countries, including the Baltic states. The conclusion of the negotiations and subsequent accession would of course depend on the progress made in each candidate country's reform programme. The enlargement process should be transparent and every country should be considered individually.

An important element in the preparation for future membership is the national process ensuring necessary adjustments to community legislation. In Norway we started this process in 1988-89, preparing for the EEA negotiations between EFTA and the EU. We found that this process, complicated and time-consuming as it was, gave us valuable knowledge of community legislation and the working procedures of the EU institutions that we needed prior to entering into accession negotiations. With this in mind, I think the most important advice we can give to the associated countries is to start this systematic process as soon as possible.

In 1996-97, the member states of the European Union are to discuss the further development of EU cooperation. This is essential to Norway as well. Therefore, we have identified certain priorities that I should like to address. To meet the new challenges of post-Cold War Europe, the Intergovernmental Conference must address five parallel issues, each of which is of the utmost importance:

Firstly, preparing for enlargement should be given top priority. The Conference should establish the framework for the next round of accession negotiations. It is, however, still unclear which institutional questions will be dealt with at the Intergovernmental Conference and which will be dealt with at the subsequent accession negotiations. Parallel to the Intergovernmental Conference and the subsequent accession negotiations, the EU member countries will have to agree on difficult issues such as reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, new financial perspectives and the financing of structural funds.

Secondly, the issue of popular support for the EU must be dealt with. The EU is not a union of governments, but of countries, peoples and voters. In many countries the public feel that the Union has lost its sense of purpose and that the EU has become obsessed with technical details of minor importance in daily life. What is Europe for? This simple question cannot be answered without focusing more on the interests and needs of the citizens of Europe. The EU must show that it can deal with the challenges that require joint efforts at European level.

We need strong, dynamic EU cooperation to cope with the challenges related to peace and stability, employment and the environment, welfare and international crime. But we do not want a EU that wastes time and resources on questions that the member states can better deal with themselves. The Union will only be strong if it is democratic. Only openness and transparency can generate trust and popular support.

Norway has a clear interest in ensuring that EU decision-making processes have a solid democratic basis and are as open and transparent as possible. We supports the steps that recently have been taken in this context in the Council's decision-making process, especially when it comes to discussion on and adoption of community legislation. Further reform in this direction should be pursued at the Intergovernmental Conference.

Thirdly, unemployment is a major challenge to every European country. In Western Europe alone, more than 20 million people are out of work. There is a clear need for more coordinated international and European measures - in addition to national policies - to solve the problems of unemployment. The interdependence of the economic policies of the European countries and the internal market provide a foundation for active and coordinated measures. The success of EMU and further economic integration in Europe is, in Norway's view, to a considerable degree dependent on progress in the fight against unemployment.

The European Union must develop clear political guidelines for an "overall" strategy for full employment. Norway supports the Swedish proposal to include a new chapter on employment policy in the treaty as a useful step in the direction of strengthening the political commitment in that regard. A Danish initiative taken at the Essen summit to explore possibilities of enhanced coordination of economic policies should also be carefully considered. Following these proposals, the IGC should make it very clear that the member states will actively support and join forces in a European strategy to reduce unemployment.

Fourthly, the Intergovernmental Conference should, in our view, lead to further progress in EU environmental policy. The Maastricht Treaty introduced important environmental principles which should be further elaborated at the IGC, particularly in relation to policy sectors such as agriculture, transport and industry. This could form a basis for a more ambitious environmental policy in the EU and EEA area. Binding minimum requirements concerning the environment in member states should, to a greater extent than at present, be adopted by the Council by qualified majority, for example minimum requirements for environmental taxes. Norway attaches great importance to improvement of the present environmental guaranty and advocates application of this guaranty retroactively in cases where new knowledge shows that already adopted rules have negative environmental consequences.

Fifthly, the future status of security and defence issues and the tasks and role of the Western European Union (WEU) in European cooperation will be a key topic of discussion at the Intergovernmental Conference. Greater openness towards the east will be an important part of this discussion, as will the future relationship between the WEU and the EU and between the WEU and NATO. The outcome of this discussion may have an impact on our own status in the WEU and on our opportunity to participate in European security and defence cooperation.

Discussion so far has revealed that there seems to be support among various key European countries that the EU in the long-term should assume greater responsibility for security and defence matters by gradually incorporating WEU's sphere of responsibilities into the EU. Other EU member states oppose this.

Norway considers it essential to participate actively in the further development of European security and defence cooperation and the WEU. European security and defence cooperation should be further developed in a way that facilitates the participation of a wider circle of European countries. It would be unwise not to take advantage of the contribution towards solving common European tasks that broad participation would offer. The WEU should be maintained as an independent organisation. If the WEU is integrated with the EU, Norway should be given an opportunity to be associated with this part of EU cooperation.

Europe has experienced profound change since the collapse of the Berlin Wall. The Iron Curtain is being replaced by a new security policy cooperation encompassing all European countries. The extended security concept implies a common understanding that security is dependent on democracy, welfare and environmental considerations in each individual country. Today's broad and more diversified range of security challenges calls for a varied set of political and institutional instruments. National, regional and pan-European cooperation arrangements and institutions must be combined in a network of collaboration that will have a mutually reinforcing effect.

To do this, we must make use of every instrument of cooperation at our disposal. This means primarily NATO and the EU, but also the Western European Union, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and the Council of Europe. Each of these organisations has its own sphere of responsibility and its own distinct advantages. The various fora must be supplemented by regional arrangements and cooperation measures. At the same time, we must intensify bilateral cooperation in a broad range of fields.

NATO has undergone a remarkable transformation in recent years. The scope of its activities has been extended, and providing assistance for the reform process in the new democracies has become a central task. The Partnership for Peace and the North Atlantic Cooperation Council are the most important instruments at NATO's disposal. The PFP addresses the military aspects of the reform process, and one of its important tasks is to ensure genuine democratic civilian control of the military forces. The PFP serves as a means of adjustment for future members of the Alliance, and also provides a formal framework of cooperation for countries that do not become members - at least not in the first round of enlargement. The PFP and the NACC should be strengthened and should play an important role independently of NATO enlargement.

Enlarging the Alliance is part of the effort to integrate the Central and Eastern European countries into broader-based cooperation. This process originated with the declaration adopted at the NATO summit in January 1994, which established that the Alliance is in principle open to new members. NATO has now presented the results of an internal study on the political and practical aspects of enlargement. This is the first stage of a process aimed at enlarging the Alliance.

NATO enlargement will take place on the basis of careful consideration. It is too early to say who the new members may be or when enlargement can take place. The process will take time. It must be carefully conducted to ensure that it does not conflict with the overall security policy objectives of NATO's member countries. However, NATO is an open organisation in which no country is in principle excluded from participating.

As we proceed, it will be necessary to review a number of issues to which the study was only able to devote limited attention. These comprise the financing of an enlarged Alliance, including the need for infrastructure investments in new member countries, changes in military forces and command structures, and the willingness and ability of new member countries to adapt to the consensus-based cooperation NATO has developed over the past almost 50 years. NATO must take the time needed to answer these questions.

The goal of the enlargement process is primarily political. Enlargement will not target any particular country and must be carried out in a way and at a rate which reinforces the basic objectives. If we proceed too quickly, or if the process comes to a standstill, we may upset the favourable, stability-promoting trend we have witnessed over the past few years. Enlargement may also function as insurance against the re-nationalisation of security and defence policy and the emergence of new regional alliances. This is of fundamental importance now that the former division of Europe into blocs no longer exists.

We consider it essential that enlargement should contribute to the development of security policy structures that safeguard the interests of all the parties involved, whether they are included in the first stage of enlargement or not. The objective is greater security, stability and predictability both in individual countries and in Europe as a whole. Enlargement would be a mistake if it were to result in the development of new dividing lines or the resurrection of old ones.

This implies a role and place for Russia. As a major power on the European continent, Russia must have a central position in the security policy architecture which is currently being designed. Broad Russian participation and Russian input are essential to any new European security structure. Norway has actively sought to promote a course of development that will include Russia, because we believe this to be in the interests of both our own security and of stability in Europe.

The evolution of NATO's relations with Russia is of primary importance. Efforts must be made to strengthen the special cooperation between NATO and Russia, in which the NACC and the PFP play a vital role. The individual partnership programme can be instrumental in the restructuring of the Russian armed forces. Regular contact between military representatives of NATO and Russia can help to promote a climate of trust and openness and reduce suspicion as regards NATO's ambitions and mode of operation. This may prove to be extremely important in the long term.

Great emphasis is also placed on developing political relations between NATO and Russia in contexts other than the PFP. Specific cooperation on a number of issues, including arms control, nuclear safety and military-related pollution, has been agreed on. A system of regular political consultations on a broad range of issues has already been established, and the aim is to adopt a political declaration later this autumn defining key principles for relations between Russia and NATO. Intensification of the practical cooperation on security policy with Russia is an important tool, particularly in the context of the discussion regarding an eastward expansion of the Alliance. It is important that our policy be characterised by openness and predictability.

Russia is in the process of defining its position and role. Many pieces have yet to fall into place. Russia is clearly seeking to reassert its position as a major power. This is reflected in its scepticism regarding NATO enlargement. Russian politicians' need to formulate and promote their national interests must be seen in this context. Nationalistic currents in Russian politics reinforce this tendency. These currents are likely to grow stronger with the approach of the country's important parliamentary elections in December.

The further development and consolidation of democratic reform and a market economy in Russia demands enormous effort. We must continue to support the forces of democracy in Russia and help to promote economic and social advances. The development of broad, binding political, military and economic cooperation with Russia is one of the most important elements in a new European security structure. But this cooperation is not open-ended. We require from the Russians that they abide by the basic principles and agreements they have signed on to.

The EU should also contribute to the development of stable relations with Russia. We welcome the signing in July of the Interim Agreement of the EU Partnership and Cooperation Accord with Russia. It is of great importance to Norway that the accession to the EU of new Nordic members has given the EU a border with Russia and the Baltic region. Work is in progress in the EU on shaping a coordinated policy for the Baltic region. Active participation and increased political attention of the European Union is of utmost importance to the further development of political, economic and practical cooperation with Russia.

Regional cooperation such as the Barents Cooperation is one important element in this. As part of a "Europe of Regions" the Barents Cooperation also provides a forum for relations between the EU and Russia. In fact, it is Norway's most important contribution to the integration of Russia into international cooperation structures and in many ways a workshop for the development of cooperation between the countries of Western Europe and Russia. Norway has a particular responsibility for ensuring that the Barents Cooperation continues to make a valuable contribution to the construction of the new Europe.

The challenges for European cooperation today are more complex than ever before. The whole concept of foreign policy-making has changed. Our focus should be on the improvement of the daily lives of the citizens of Europe and the "soft" aspects of security such as employment, the environment, democracy and transparency. We will follow with great interest the further discussions taking place in various European organisations. I wish you good luck in your continued deliberations at this conference on the important issues related to EU and NATO enlargement.