Generals and Admirals, honoured guests and members,

INTRODUCTION

It is always an honour to give the New Year Address here at the Oslo Military Society. When the subject concerns defence and security policy, this is Norway’s most prestigious platform.

The Society was founded by young, courageous and open-minded men willing to embrace change. Men who wanted to chart a new course. The list of members contained 58 names, and none were over 40. Majors and officers of more senior rank were not admitted.

‘The Society’ was characterised by lively, dynamic discussions and the focus was on the future. In more recent times, both generals and cabinet ministers have contributed to the debate.

In the Armed Forces we can now look back on two years of radical restructuring and many painful measures. Now, as then, it is courage and willingness to embrace change that have proved decisive. We are on the right course – and moving ahead.

• We have shown that we are a learning organisation – capable of new thinking.
• We have shown that we are a living organisation – and one capable of adapting.
• We have shown that we can play a leading part in NATO in important areas,
• and we have shown that our armed services can deliver the forces that are needed.

This is my vision for the Armed Forces: a living organisation that can learn and lead – and that can deliver.

If the Armed Forces are to be able to meet unforeseen challenges, whenever and wherever they may arise, we must have the capability to react.

The change of course has been made. Now we have military transformation on the agenda.

WHAT HAVE WE ACHIEVED TO DATE?

On Friday, 7 November, a Russian Antonov transport took off from Gardermoen with personnel from the Telemark Battalion. Their destination – halfway round the world – was Afghanistan.

Just four weeks earlier, NATO’s Secretary general had requested forces to ensure the security of delegates to the Loya Jirga, Afghanistan’s national Grand Assembly, meeting to agree a new constitution.

Firstly, in this connection, a new constitution for Afghanistan is of vital importance to the future political development of that country.

Secondly, bringing political order to Afghanistan will help to ensure that the country is no longer seen as an attractive training ground for future terrorists.

If we can help to reduce the number of trained terrorists, we are at the same time helping to ensure our own security. Or, as Lord Robertson put it at the NATO meeting in December: “If we do not go to Afghanistan, Afghanistan will come to us.”

Thirdly, NATO’s ability to deliver is at stake in Afghanistan. NATO has undertaken to do a job. And that job now has to be done. Democracy must be allowed to develop. Yesterday the basis for a new constitution was agreed. Norway is playing its part – in what has to be done.

The Armed Forces have demonstrated their ability to deliver force contributions within the Alliance – and at short notice. Our service personnel are also making important contributions to operations in the Balkans, in Iraq and in the Mediterranean.

If we look back just a few years, the position was very different.

In the aftermath of NATO’s operations against Milosevic in the Balkans in 1999, the Armed Forces found it difficult to establish the force that we ourselves had declared as our contribution to KFOR.

Not until three months after KFOR had been fully established in the area of operations was the Norwegian battalion combat group deployed.

When the force finally arrived in Kosovo, General Sir Michael Jackson, the KFOR Commander, is said to have remarked: “What took you so long? Have you been walking?”

For an army officer of the old school, the general’s question might have been taken as a compliment. No-one can walk further, or carry heavier loads, than our own young men and women.

But the question, for all its British understatement, implied an unmistakable criticism of Norway’s military ability to deliver.

This is no criticism of those who took part in the Kosovo operation. They did a very good job. I mention the incident only to highlight the consequences of having a defence organisation lacking the capability for rapid reaction.

The deployment of forces to Afghanistan, and now to Iraq, demonstrates that the Armed Forces have made an impressive quantum leap both in their reaction capability and in their ability to deliver. We have shown that we can learn!

This reflects great credit, not only on those who served in Kosovo, in Kirgistan, in Afghanistan and now in Iraq, but also on all who, in a multitude of support roles, made it possible to carry out these missions.

And it is not only those now serving in the defence organisation who deserve credit for these achievements. Today’s armed forces are the product of a culture, a process of national development, to which everyone in this hall has contributed, both the young among you – and those not quite so young.

If we look at what the Armed Forces have done in recent years, it is quite clear that a lot has been done right.

In Parliamentary Proposition no. 45 – the four year plan for the period from spring 2001 – the critical situation was compared to being in the crossfire between imbalances. One imbalance between the resources required and the resources available and a second imbalance between the structure of the Armed Forces and the tasks that they were being asked to carry out.

Six months later, our old established world order was shattered by aircraft hijacked in the skies above Manhattan. Since that day the situation has become no less unpleasant.

Our defence organisation is in the process of radical restructuring while, at the same time, we are participating in demanding operations in parts of the world where, just a few years ago, no-one could have imagined finding uniformed Norwegians.

Some say that the public sector lacks the ability to change. My contention, on the contrary, is that very few private businesses would have been able to carry out such a fundamental restructuring in such an impressive way.

When we met here a year ago, I listed seven important tasks for 2003:

1. Firstly I said that the defence organisation needed a leaner and more effective strategic leadership, and that the new integrated Ministry of Defence should become a reality as from 1 August.

This is now a fact. An integrated Ministry of Defence and a new Defence Staff are now in place, bringing a wealth of experience and ideas for further improvement. This experience will enable us to fine tune the organisation in good time before the Ministry is able to move into its new building.

2. Secondly, I said that Norway must ensure its position in NATO’s new command structure. I promised that we would work hard to show that Norway should be chosen as the location of the “European footprint” of NATO’s new Strategic Command, the so-called Allied Command Transformation (ACT).

This we have achieved. The Joint Warfare Centre is now in place in Stavanger, directly subordinate to ACT in Norfolk, Virginia. And we are establishing an Allied Centre of Excellence for Winter Operations at Jåttå.

We are able to offer the best training and exercise facilities for our allies, as well as for NATO’s new rapid reaction Response Force.

When allied units train in Norway, not only do they gain experience of Norwegian conditions but our own competence is also enhanced in the process. And the Allied presence is further cemented.

3. Thirdly, I promised that the Chief of Defence’s new Military Study would be ready in late autumn.

This was achieved and the Ministry is now working to full capacity on the next four-year Proposition covering the period 2005-2008 – a year ahead of time.

4. Fourthly, I promised to follow up the commitments we made at the NATO Summit in Prague as our contribution to the so-called Prague Capability Commitment (PCC).

This has been done. Norway took the lead in NATO’s work on an improved strategic sealift capability. Shortly before Christmas, nine nations signed an agreement concerning emergency planning contracts for NATO’s rapid deployment Response Force. Through the use of such contracts with the shipping industry, individual countries can make substantial savings in capital investment.

Another example in the context of the PCC is the joint agreement with 10 other countries concerning strategic airlift capacity. On a yearly basis we pay for access to a certain number of flying hours using large transport aircraft, larger than those we ourselves possess. And Norway is party to a joint agreement that provides us with an in-flight refuelling capability for our F-16 aircraft.

In short, we get more – for less!

5. Fifthly, I said that we should seek to strengthen cooperation with our closest allies through means including a North Sea Strategy.

This, again, we have done. Our aircraft have, in concert with allied squadrons from Denmark and the Netherlands, been operating in the skies over Afghanistan. The Army is in the process of forging close collaboration with the Netherlands involving the exchange and co-use of materiel. And, moreover, the Telemark Battalion has been declared to NATO’s rapid reaction Response Force in spring 2005 within the framework of the German-Netherlands Corps.

Again, greater effectiveness at less cost – through cooperation.

6. Sixthly, I said that Norway would support a division of roles and cooperation between NATO and the EU, thus avoiding having to waste money on duplicated structures.

I wish I could say that we had succeeded here too. Unfortunately, however, our position as EU “outsiders” has meant that the results of this work are decided by others than ourselves. Norwegian membership of the EU may not be an immediate prospect – but my ambition is that we should eventually succeed in joining.

7. Finally, I said that we would be following up the work of the NATO-Russia Council and work towards a deeper partnership between NATO and Russia.

Here, again, we have achieved our aim – in close cooperation with the Russians. We are now engaged in a positive dialogue with our neighbour to the East.

Norway engages in exchange visits with Russia covering all branches of the Armed Forces, and, in October, Russia gave NATO a presentation of its Defence “White Paper”, which included the ambition to form a NATO-interoperable brigade.

In 2003 we achieved the aims we had set ourselves.

We are redirecting resource flow from support activities to operational activities. We are participating in international operations with forces of high quality. We are meeting the challenges that today’s threat situation poses to modern military forces.

These achievements of the Armed Forces have earned wide acknowledgement and our credibility as a serious partner in the Alliance has been strengthened.

It may be that the corn ripens a little late in these northern latitudes, but once harvested, its quality is second to none.

FUTURE CHALLENGES

Much has been achieved. But much still remains to be done.

Norway’s security is linked to the security of the wider world. It is for this reason that we wish to contribute to the creation of a safe, open and free global community. We must be able to depend on the Armed Forces to deliver what is needed, both nationally and internationally.

In an unpredictable and changing world, however, we require more than simply a change of course. That is why, both in NATO and in Norway, the focus is on a military “transformation”.

Transformation

The aim is to ensure that we have the ability, on a lasting basis, to meet new challenges by adapting the characteristics of our military forces, the way in which these forces are composed and the way in which they operate.

Military transformation must be an ongoing and proactive process. A process in which new concepts and doctrines are developed and integrated. A process which enhances the capabilities of the Armed Forces, makes the organisation of Norwegian defence more efficient and improves still further our ability to cooperate both nationally and internationally.

We can only achieve this if we alter our whole way of thinking.

I have this evening invited three overseas guests to join us via the video screen. This is because the new challenges concern not only Norway but all the NATO countries.

NATO’s new Supreme Allied Commander Transformation, Admiral Edmund Giambastiani, whose Command has replaced SACLANT, has the following to say about transformation: (Video recording of Admiral Giambastiani)

Adapting to changing circumstances is nothing revolutionary. It is something that all organisations do..

What is new about the focus on military transformation is that the capability for ongoing change and evolution, even when there may be no specific enemy or threat, becomes a permanent characteristic of the activities of the military forces.

If we are to bring about a real increase in defensive capability, we have to rid ourselves of the mental baggage of yesterday’s threat picture.

No longer can we tailor our forces to meet one specific threat, or to fight one specific war, as we did up until 1989.

In today’s situation it is not a question of whether we are “well” or “badly” prepared for a particular war at a particular time. The question now is whether, at any given time, our forces are truly usable and capable of delivering. That is why we are focusing on transformation.

“Usability”

At the NATO summit meeting in Prague our top priority aim was to strengthen the military capability of the Alliance. This was to be achieved by committing ourselves to particular new capabilities, the so-called Prague Capabilities Commitment, and a strengthening of the Alliance’s ability to react rapidly through the NATO Response Force, both allied to a new command structure. In short NATO would be better able to deliver.

At the NATO summit meeting in Istanbul this summer the priority aim will be to strengthen NATO’s “usability”. In other words to make the Alliance, including Norway, better able to deliver what is needed – when and where it is needed.

This was one of the main themes of the NATO meeting held in December.

(Video recording of the then Secretary General of NATO, Lord Robertson)

What does it mean for Norway that our armed services should be more “usable”?

To be usable means having the capability for swift, effective and credible action, be it establishing a presence, the exercising of sovereignty, surveillance or crisis management here at home – always the most important!

To be usable also means having the ability to ensure that NATO can, and will, support us here at home if the situation should require it. We can do this by demonstrating our own ability – and will – to defend ourselves. Globalisation and advances in technology mean that conflicts in distant parts of the world can have direct consequences for us here in Norway. The protection afforded by geographical remoteness is now significantly reduced.

Norway’s sphere of interest thus today stretches from the border at Jacobselv to the streets of Kabul. Being usable entails being able to take action both here at home and abroad when the need arises.

Both missions are of decisive importance to our own security.

So being usable means having the ability to deploy military force effectively, in concert with our allies, both in home waters and in Afghanistan.

We prove our usability each time the report “Mission accomplished” is received. It may apply equally to the exercise of Norwegian sovereignty in northern waters or to the towing to safety of a drifting oil tanker. Or, again, to a mission involving the destruction of an underground bunker, to airlifting in medicines to a besieged city or to helping the civil authorities to establish a stable and democratic administrative framework.

“Mission accomplished” is when we reinstate electricity pylons torn down by looters in Iraq, and when we help to ensure the safety of the Constitutional Loya Jirga in Afghanistan.

The decision taken in Prague, to set up NATO’s new rapid reaction Response Force (NRF), is an important step towards making NATO’s forces more usable and to enhance the credibility of the Alliance’s collective defence capability.

Responsibility for creation of the Response Force rests with the new Allied Command Operations under the Supreme Allied Commander Operations, General James L. Jones, who also retains the title of SACEUR.

(Video recording of General James L. Jones)

The NRF will be capable of remaining at a high state of readiness for extended periods. Being usable means that Norway contributes units and other force elements to the NRF in line with our own capabilities and NATO’s needs.

The NRF will employ a new way of declaring forces to NATO on a rotational basis, involving periods of training followed by a six-month ‘on-call’ period, which in turn leads to fairer load sharing between the member nations – and a more realistic and effective reaction capability for the Alliance as a whole.

Learning, living, leading – and able to deliver

To be usable entails more than simply being able to deliver. A truly usable organisation must also be learning, living and leading. All these elements are essential if we are to succeed in the transformation of Norway’s armed forces.

If Norwegian defence is to be based on a learning organisation, we must be capable of rapidly putting our experience to good use in the development of new doctrines and operational concepts.

The experience we gather from actual operations, or from training and exercising with our allies, must form the basis of new doctrines and operational concepts better matched to the new threats that we face. This process of concept development and experimentation must therefore be an integral part of our defence activities.

If any of you should feel that I am now going round in circles, then you have clearly been listening!

Because we are talking about a circular process, a process in which experience from real operations, from the last exercise, or from new technology, comes together in the formulation of new doctrines and concepts – to be applied in future operations and training and so on.

We will benefit greatly from having the Joint Warfare Centre located in Norway, bearing in mind the important role that the Centre will play in NATO’s concept development work, as well as in connection with exercises, training and experimental activities.

Norway is unique as a training area for allied forces. These activities also, of course, serve to cement the allied presence in Norway. But they also provide us with valuable experience; a unique link between training and operations, a link between Jåttå and the main body of Norway’s defence organisation.

That is why we have established a Centre of Excellence at Jåttå where the focus is on military experience and the lessons learned. The work of the centre will ensure that experience gained, from both training and operations, is fed directly back into the development of relevant new doctrines.

Again, if the defence organisation is to be a living organisation, it must be well-proportioned. We cannot have an organisation with a head so large that its legs cannot support it. That is why we have to prune back elements of the defence structure for which there is no longer the same requirement.

A living organisation also requires room for initiative and creativity. If we are to experiment and seek new avenues for improvement, the Armed Forces have to cultivate the ability to envisage new solutions and new ways of utilising the equipment that we already have. We have to foster an entrepreneurial spirit that can breathe life into new solutions.

The joint operating environment created in the Norwegian Battle Lab and Experimentation, NOBLE, established at Bodø, is an example of how we can help to stimulate creativity and initiative. Success in our mission to transform Norwegian defence requires that we dare to develop new solutions, dare to take our place at the cutting edge of these developments.

Similarly, if the defence organisation is to play a leading part, we must have an organisation that dares to aim for excellence, to be amongst the best – and to be proud of it.

It is a fact that Norway can, in some areas, offer military capabilities that are among the best in the world.

Winter warfare operations, coastal operations, transport management, multinational logistics and the clearance of mines and other explosive devices are all fields in which Norway occupies a leading position.

This because expertise in these areas has been of prime importance to our own national defence capability. And because we have a natural advantage here, we have important niche areas of expertise to offer NATO – expertise that is in great demand in the Alliance.

Some may say that Norway will soon be able to offer only expertise in niche areas. This would be wrong. These niche skills exist within companies, battalions and brigades, just as before. NATO, however, will not necessary need an entire battalion; more often, the need will be for a smaller unit. That is why the ‘tool-kit’ principle is important. We need to be able to contribute either a fully integrated unit or a combination of smaller specialised elements.

Armed forces that are truly able to deliver are armed forces that are equipped and trained to establish a military presence, to deliver the relevant military strike power – and to display the right attitudes.

WHAT THE NEXT LONG-TERM PLAN (2005-2008) WILL CONTAIN

The above considerations form the basis of the work being done on the Proposition containing the next Long-Term Plan for the Armed Forces. The main thrust is towards the development if a defence organisation in which transformation is a natural fact of life for all branches and units of the Armed Forces. Effectiveness, flexibility and usability will be the key characteristics.

Bringing this to fruition will require the entire defence organisation to embrace creativity, new thinking and a willingness to adapt. We have to make room for flexibility – mentally, organisationally and financially.

All change is about people and professional skills. We must therefore focus more closely on our most important resource – our men and women.

The missions, structure and make-up of the Armed Forces have undergone drastic change, but these changes have not been adequately reflected either in the arrangements for personnel administration or in the training system.

The Armed Forces need highly motivated and skilled men and women. We must be able to recruit – and to retain – the best.

We must also ensure that the right man and the right woman are employed in the right place. We must have the courage to alter the traditional recruiting and appointment procedures to make quite sure that we have the right people in the right positions.

We must foster a culture in the organisation in which men and women with a natural aptitude for solutions, that is to say with the right blend of competence, insight and attitude, occupy central positions. Creativity, the willingness – and ability – to embrace change, combined with solid professional competence, must be key criteria for our future officers.

Last year I outlined seven tasks for 2003. This year I want to mention eight important challenges that are central to the new Long-Term Plan and to the work of creating a better Defence.

Compulsory military service – the cornerstone

The first of these challenges concerns the Armed Forces’ need to recruit the most able and the most highly motivated young men and women. The Armed Forces need to be given the best possible opportunity to recruit those with the appropriate skills that are so important to the successful, accomplishment of the missions of the Armed Forces, both at home and abroad.

For this we need compulsory military service. Such military service forms a main plank of our defence system. Compulsory military service helps to anchor defence and the armed forces firmly in the Norwegian psyche. This means that the principle of universal military service must stay. And it means that a sufficiently high proportion of our young people must undertake this service.

For this policy to succeed, military service needs to be perceived as a positive, stimulating and meaningful experience – and those who serve must be properly rewarded. In other words:

• military service must be meaningful,
• the period of service must attract valuable higher education credits, and
• increased demobilisation grants must be paid on completion of 12 months service.

Firstly we have to ensure that undertaking this period military service continues to be held in high regard in the community at large and, secondly, we must make sure that young people who serve in this way are duly rewarded in their subsequent working life for having done so.

Modernised Officer Candidate Schools

The second important challenge is to attract more young officer candidates who already have some experience. It is these candidates who will go on to fill management posts and perform specialised duties in the more junior ranks of the Armed Forces – and we need them.

To make this happen, we must modernise the officer candidate schools – not close them. We can do this by introducing a more flexible and more operationally-oriented course curriculum on the pattern already being adopted by some of the schools.

The objective, of course, is to make many more young people interested in becoming an officer. This calls for a flexible system of recruiting. We should retain the existing ‘recruiting track’ direct from upper secondary school. Not least, however, we need to recruit more girls. In addition we must be able to attract recruits directly from conscripts undertaking their ordinary period of initial military service.

This will provide both a broader recruiting base and a closer linkage, in an operational environment, between officer training and ordinary military service.

More junior officers with experience

The third important challenge is to attract more junior officers with experience. This is important from the point of view of raising the level of personnel safety both when engaged in dangerous and demanding operations abroad and during exercises at home. In recent years there have been a number of tragic accidents during training and exercise activities. Last year three young men lost their lives.

If such tragedies are to be avoided in future, we need to be able to bring in more older, and more experienced, junior officers to serve in ranks up to captain level.

Armed Forces which are leaner in terms of manpower numbers, but more effective militarily, require fewer top level officers. Conversely, however, they require more younger officers – officers who nevertheless have some experience – to undertake operational missions at unit level in the field.

The introduction of more modern and advanced systems and equipment also increases the demand for skilled and experienced personnel. We have to develop a personnel structure which meets the needs of the new Armed Forces in terms of skills, experience, age structure and continuity.

One approach is to establish an officer corps offering more predictable service contracts. The new category of officer would have the same rights and obligations as regular career officers but would be engaged on shorter but predictable commissions.

The training and pattern of service for these officers would be arranged to enable the new entrants to work with older officers, so building up a solid body of experience in a range of more junior posts.

A scheme on these lines is among the proposals for a new officer structure put forward by the Chief of Defence.

Predictable availability of personnel for operations

The fourth challenge is to meet the Armed Forces’ need for greater stability and predictability with regard to the availability of personnel to man all the operations in which the Armed Forces participate.

Operations abroad form a natural part of the overall mission of the Armed Forces. From the Germany Brigade, set up in the wake of the second World War, to today’s operations in Afghanistan, there is a consistent thread of such international activity. Our capability to take part in such international operations has a strong bearing on our ability to undertake our own national defence tasks.

The Armed Forces therefore must be assured of the availability of personnel to man this type of operation. The right personnel must be available when the situation demands it. Service on such operations, and not least the professional benefit derived from the experience gained on such missions, must be distributed fairly over the whole of the officer corps.

The Armed Forces must take family welfare into account in such a way that no particular groups, or individuals, are subjected to undue strain. This means devising rotation arrangements that are sensible and fair, and developing the necessary level of competence throughout the officer corps.

The Chief of Defence would like to see the obligation to accept posting on international operations extended to all officers.

Such a scheme would have to be applied responsibly and flexibly, and would require sensible rotation arrangements to take account of family life and the need for a good working environment.

The aim is to ensure, as far as possible, that recruiting for this type of operation should be on a voluntary basis. As it is today. It may well, however, be necessary to retain the right to draft certain personnel, in order to avoid the possibility of an operation, which we are obliged to undertake, being prejudiced through the lack of particular groups or key personnel. In such cases, retention of this right could provide a desirable safety valve.

From support structure to activity and ‘the sharp end’

The fifth challenge relates to the need to strengthen the operational side of the Armed Forces’ activities.

To achieve this we have to make the support structure more efficient. The focus and organisation of the support structure also needs to be more operationally oriented.

The Chief of Defence also emphasises the need to make savings in the Defence Logistics Organisation (FLO). In future the FLO will primarily be responsible for services and products which, for emergency planning or operational reasons, have to be produced within the defence organisation.

This means that new forms of organisation, management principles, competitive procurement, contracting out, and private-public partnerships will be assessed.

We are also facing substantial challenges in connection with the manning reductions endorsed by the Storting. These manpower reductions are an essential element of the savings that have to be made in defence operating costs which, in turn, are essential to the overall transformation process and the increase in emphasis on ‘sharp end’ activities.

Both the Defence Logistics Organisation and the Defence Estates Agency, together with other elements of the support structure, must bear their share of the manning cuts. This will enable resources to be freed for real improvements in defence capability through the prioritisation of exercises, investment in new materiel, preparedness measures and operations.

Quality upgrade for the Home Guard

This sixth challenge concerns the need for a Home Guard that is better equipped to match the present-day threat picture on a national basis, both as part of our overall territorial defences and in the area of civil-military cooperation.

The Home Guard must be better able to concentrate its forces wherever the need arises, especially in the context of special operations. The Home Guard must be capable of assisting in the prevention and combating of terrorism and other asymmetric threats, as well as protecting functions vital to the safety and wellbeing of society.

To achieve these ends, the Chief of Staff, Norwegian Home Guard, wants to upgrade quality throughout the Home Guard. The reforms envisaged include cutting the number of posts in the administrative structure and changing the method of division into districts. Also proposed is the development of a core element consisting of voluntary forces at a high state of readiness – rapid reaction forces – capable of undertaking special tasks whenever the need arises.

The more traditional tasks will be handled locally by reinforcement and follow-up forces which will have undergone appropriate training and exercising on an annual basis. To enable these quality reforms to be implemented, it is proposed that the current level of funding should be maintained.

Redefinition of the mission of the Home Guard, combined with stricter prioritisation of the various tasks, will make service in the Home Guard both more interesting for those who serve so capably, and more relevant to the new security situation.

A network-based Defence

The seventh of the challenges I wish to highlight is the move towards network-based defence (NBD) in the interests of more effective decision-making and more closely coordinated joint action.

If we are to succeed in transforming the Armed Forces, we must embrace new technology to a level that enables us to operate efficiently either on a single-Service basis, in a joint-Service environment, or in concert with allied forces either in Norway or elsewhere.

We have to be more network-based than we are today.

Through the use of new information technology we can link together capabilities and actors, across service boundaries and at different levels in the organisation. This will give us the capacity to carry out military operations more effectively. It will enhance our defensive capability.

In this year’s defence budget we have allocated NOK 224 million for the acquisition of LINK 16. This will link together our F-16 combat aircraft, frigates and MTBs on a common data network, so providing a far better joint picture of the situation. This advantage in situation awareness, this information superiority, will give us an important strategic advantage in real operations.

We shall not be able to implement NBD in all its details in the course of the next four-year planning period. But one thing we do know: we must move away from stationary, platform-based structures and establish more dynamic, network-based structures that allow commanders, units and capabilities to operate together to good effect.

The actual number of units and platforms is of secondary importance. The essential thing is that they should function smoothly together.

As a first step in this direction, the Chief of Defence proposes that we gather together the various deployable command, control and information systems to form a single joint-Service operational facility. It is envisaged that this facility will support the deployment of Norwegian forces with strategic and tactical information and communication technology (ICT) both nationally and internationally. The overall intention is to enhance interoperability throughout the Armed Forces.

Another contribution is the establishment of an ISTAR capability composed of modules from both 6th Division and the Coastal Rangers. ISTAR stands for “Intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance”, and is a concept designed to integrate and synchronise the use of sensors and information, intelligence and target acquisition data in support of operations.

A Norwegian ISTAR capability must be flexible, modular, and capable of operating both in a national context and jointly with allies.

Strategic management of investments

The eighth and final challenge I would touch upon concerns better strategic management of defence procurement investments. Operational requirements need to be met more rapidly and more effectively than is the case today and there needs to be closer coordination between strategic and operational levels.

Similarly, the individual service branches must maintain a closer dialog with the Ministry concerning the regular auditing and adjustment of the existing investment portfolios. This applies to both materiel procurement and construction work.

Multinational collaboration in the fields of procurement, maintenance and training is essential if we are to be able to fund new capabilities. By acting in collaboration with others, small countries like Norway can have access to capabilities that could never be achieved alone.

Current examples of such collaboration include the Army’s cooperation with the Netherlands, the collaborative activities between the Air Forces of Norway, Denmark and the Netherlands, the AWACS aircraft and the collaborative projects within NATO for new strategic airlift, sealift and in-flight refuelling capabilities.

CONCLUSION

I started by drawing attention to the role played by the Oslo Military Society as a pioneering forum for the dynamic and forward-looking discussion of aspects of defence and security policy.

We have now had an opportunity for some lateral thinking, unconstrained by traditional boundaries.

We live in a time when the maintenance of freedom and security at home and abroad means that we must shift our focus from yesterday’s challenges to those of tomorrow.

That is what transformation is about; new ways of thinking, new ways of doing things.

The challenges we face are enough to take the breath away. There are people and regimes in the world who wish to inflict serious damage both on individual inhabitants and on our society as a whole. People who do not accept the civilised principles of human rights or peaceful global coexistence.

That is why important steps are being taken, both in Norway and within the NATO Alliance, to develop defences which can give real security in the face of the dangers that threaten. Defences with real capabilities to thwart the threats and to defeat attack wherever it might come. Defences capable of rapid reaction either alone or in concert with allies. That is why we need transformation.

I should like to convey my particular thanks to all of you who are engaged in the ongoing process of restructuring, and who have faced the daunting tasks with such enthusiasm and determination. We have come a long way and we are on the right course. Our forces abroad are doing a splendid job. And the success of their efforts owes much to the progress of restructuring here at home.

Today Norway has 1,000 men and women engaged on missions abroad, some of which are highly dangerous. They are making an outstanding contribution towards the prevention of terrorism, creating safe conditions and allowing democracy to be given a chance in communities that have been sorely tried. They are making a contribution that will not be forgotten.

In 1915, one Lieutenant Colonel Sophus Christensen penned a study of Norway’s position with regard to military policy at that time. Roughly translated, the preface to his study contains the following caution:

“This book contains no military secrets, but is intended for consideration by Norwegians; it ought not to find its way into foreign hands. It should therefore not be displayed openly in public offices, waiting rooms, railway stations, air-raid shelters, or in places where tourists or anyone else may happen to be. Nor must it be sent beyond our national borders.”

Before long the Proposition containing the next Long-Term Plan will be published. The document contains no military secrets but it will show that we are on course and moving ahead – towards transformation. It should, therefore, most definitely find its way into foreign hands, and I would welcome its display in waiting rooms, railway stations and public offices. I would encourage all present to read it and to send it by post far beyond Norway’s borders.

Defence has always been a matter of great interest. The next Long-Term Plan will therefore be read, studied and commented upon. This is the sign of a free and healthy society.

A society worth fighting for.

I thank you for your kind attention, and I wish you all a Happy New Year.