Foreign Minister Jan Petersen’s statement on foreign policy to the Storting, 16 October 2002

Mr. President,

International terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are the most immediate threats to international peace and security today. This awareness has united the overwhelming majority of the world’s nations in the fight against those who have been willing to use such means to attack the fundamental values of our societies and thereby undermine both human dignity and our democratic way of life.

Today the attention of the international community is primarily focused on the uncertainty surrounding Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. This uncertainty is in itself a threat to international peace and stability.

The situation is made even more serious by the fact that the regime in Baghdad has been willing to use such weapons to achieve its aims. Iraq has twice invaded neighbouring countries, and has killed several thousand of its own citizens and Iranian soldiers using chemical weapons. We must therefore be prepared for the fact that in a given situation, the Iraqi regime may resort to such weapons again unless it is prevented from doing so.

Since the Gulf War ended in 1991, the UN Security Council has repeatedly demanded that Iraq cooperate in destroying or removing all of its weapons of mass destruction and means of delivery, or in rendering them harmless. The Council has also ordered Iraq to give the UN weapons inspectors unfettered access. The demands made on Iraq are set out in a series of Security Council resolutions.

Nevertheless, we have received information – from the USA and other close allies – to the effect that Iraq still has access to chemical and biological weapons. It is also said that Iraq has an active nuclear weapons programme and that it will soon be capable of developing nuclear weapons if the regime manages to acquire highly enriched uranium. In addition, we have been told that Iraq has delivery systems that will enable it to attack neighbouring countries with such weapons of mass destruction. There are a number of independent research reports that have dealt with this in great detail.

However, the only way to answer the questions concerning Iraqi weapons of mass destruction with any certainty is by carrying out a full and unfettered weapons inspection in the country. The main challenge facing the members of the Security Council now, Norway included, is how we can ensure credible inspections. The inspections are not an end in themselves, but a means for the international community to satisfy itself that Iraq no longer possesses weapons of mass destruction.

Since President Bush spoke to the UN General Assembly on 12 September, Iraq has expressed its willingness to allow the weapons inspectors to return unconditionally. It is too early to tell whether Iraq’s ostensibly unconditional consent is a sign of a real change of attitude and willingness to comply with its obligation to cooperate fully with the UN. Unfortunately, all previous experience indicates that promises from the regime in Baghdad must be viewed with considerable scepticism.

The head of the UN weapons inspection team, Hans Blix, has discussed practical arrangements for the resumption of inspections with Iraqi representatives. According to Dr. Blix, there are still issues that have not yet been clarified. Dr. Blix himself prefers that UNMOVIC’s mandate is fully clarified before the inspectors return. This is also my position.

We should have a clear and unambiguous Security Council resolution, with a clear and unambiguous timetable, as a basis for the new inspections. Another important element in such a resolution must be free access for the inspectors to the whole of Iraq. This means that the Security Council will have to repeal the agreement concluded between Iraq and the UN in 1998 on special procedures for inspecting the so-called presidential sites, which include several hundred buildings, unless Iraq itself declares that it will disregard the agreement. The point is that no buildings or sites can be given immunity from inspection if we are to get definite answers to the questions linked to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. We cannot have an inspections system that has loopholes.

The discussions in the Security Council so far have shown a growing recognition of the necessity of intensifying the pressure on Iraq. This autumn’s debate in the General Assembly also demonstrated that the international community will no longer accept that Iraq ignores binding UN resolutions. In other words, there is broad international agreement that the Security Council should become actively involved in the efforts to fully eliminate Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.

Consultations are currently going on between the five permanent members of the Security Council on the elements of a new resolution. It is absolutely essential that the five reach agreement on a text. So far no draft resolution has been tabled, which also indicates that the consultations reflect the seriousness of the situation.

One of the main questions on which the five permanent members disagree is whether and when military force should be used if Iraq continues to ignore Security Council resolutions. The USA and the UK in particular have advocated a tougher stance, and that a new Security Council resolution must send a clear and unequivocal warning that force will be used if the Council’s demands are not complied with.

It is still too early to say anything definite about whether the five permanent members of the Security Council will be able to reach agreement on an ultimatum to Iraq, which would provide the basis for coercive measures if the demands are not complied with.

In the Government’s view, there are two main concerns that must be dealt with by the Security Council in the Iraq issue.

Firstly, it is essential to work towards the elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems without using military force. Therefore, the Security Council resolution must be worded in such a way that it produces the desired effect in Baghdad. In our view, there must be absolutely no doubt that failure to comply will have extremely serious consequences for the country.

Secondly, any reaction to Iraq must be anchored in international law. The Security Council’s demands on Iraq are clear and precise. We feel strongly that this matter is the province of the Security Council, and are pleased that it is now being dealt with there.

Military measures would probably have extremely serious consequences for Iraq and its people. And they could also have a considerable impact on the region as a whole and on the cohesion of the broad coalition against international terrorism. This makes it even more important for the UN Security Council to stand united so that its legitimacy, credibility and authority are upheld.

Mr. President,

The uncertainty surrounding weapons of mass destruction is not, unfortunately, confined to Iraq. We are aware that terrorist groups have tried to procure both nuclear weapons and chemical and biological warfare agents. The terrorist attacks on the USA last year showed in a particularly gruesome way that ruthless terrorists are capable of using any means to achieve their ends. Possession of weapons of mass destruction by such groups opens up frightening perspectives.

We can point to a number of concrete, positive results in the fight against international terrorism. The training camps belonging to the terrorist organization Al Qaida have been destroyed. The Taliban regime, which set the development of Afghanistan back by several decades, has been defeated. The reconstruction of the country is well under way. Thus, even though great challenges still remain in Afghanistan, the foundation has been laid for further progress.

However, the fight against international terrorism is not yet over. The terrorist attacks on Bali a few days ago are a horrific reminder of this.

Al Qaida’s leaders are still at large, and parts of the network appear to be intact. So far Al Qaida has always operated with a long time frame and used extremely divergent methods. We must therefore continue to assume that they are capable of planning and carrying out extensive terrorist operations.

The fight against international terrorism can only be won by means of a concerted effort under the auspices of the UN Security Council. Military measures must go hand in hand with political, diplomatic, legal and economic measures.

I am convinced that the international community is prepared to continue its efforts to combat international terrorism. This applies both to supporting the reconstruction activities in Afghanistan and to the military operations.

Security and stability are basic preconditions if we are to succeed in reconstructing Afghan society and creating better lives for the people of Afghanistan. A stable security situation is also essential to enable the civilian government led by President Karzai to consolidate its position. It is from this perspective that we must view our participation in the military operations. Military measures are necessary in order to safeguard the country’s security. Thus, these resources are not being used at the expense of those we use on humanitarian measures and reconstruction, but also serve to support them.

The military operations – both the US-led military coalition and the international security assistance force (ISAF) – are necessary to support the reconstruction efforts and to provide effective assistance to Afghanistan. On this issue we see eye to eye with the UN special envoy to Afghanistan, Lakhadar Brahimi.

We have a long-term perspective on our involvement in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. The needs and challenges will be considerable for a long time to come. We are conscious of our responsibility and will therefore continue to provide a high level of assistance. Lasting security is contingent on the success of the reconstruction effort.

As chair of the Afghanistan Support Group, we are working to ensure that the humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people is as effective as possible and to support the reconstruction effort in its broadest sense. The Support Group has proved to be a useful tool for coordinating the efforts of the donor countries and the UN.

The Support Group will hold its annual meeting in Oslo in December. The meeting will outline a framework for future assistance and in this way confirm the commitment to continued political and economic support for emergency relief and reconstruction in Afghanistan. The Government has invited President Karzai, who will attend the meeting. This indicates the importance the Afghan authorities attach to this work.

Mr. President,

The situation in the Middle East is more difficult than it has been for a very long time. Israel is continuing its heavy-handed occupation and a policy focused exclusively on security. And the Palestinian authorities are showing insufficient willingness to combat suicide attacks and other terrorist acts.

The situation that is unfolding is tragic for both the Palestinian and the Israeli civilian population. During the past two years more than 600 Israelis and more than 1700 Palestinians have been killed. Many thousands have been maimed. The lives of both Israelis and Palestinians are permeated by anxiety, pessimism and the difficult economic situation. On the Palestinian side, almost all normal economic activity has come to a standstill in the past few months.

Unfortunately the parties show little ability or willingness to conduct themselves in a way that will enable them to extricate themselves from the current deadlock.

The Government strongly criticizes the repeated Israeli military attacks in heavily populated Palestinian towns and refugee camps. Such operations will never bring Israel long-term security. This can only be achieved through a political solution. In our contacts with the Israeli authorities we have therefore stressed that such attacks are unacceptable and that they put new obstacles in the way of dialogue.

We condemn the Palestinian suicide bombings. Such actions torpedo any chance of reaching a compromise with Israel.

A great responsibility rests on the Palestinian leadership to put a stop to these meaningless terrorist acts. Even though most of the Palestinian security apparatus has gradually been destroyed, President Arafat could in our view do more to combat terrorism. He must condemn such actions clearly and in no uncertain terms, and create a broad political front against all forms of terror and violence. Therefore, it is essential that the international community continues to put pressure on the parties to break out of the vicious circle of terror and violence. Every effort must be made to set a genuine political process in motion.

As recently as 24 September, the UN Security Council demanded the complete cessation of all acts of violence and an immediate end to all Israeli actions, including those directed at President Arafat’s headquarters. Norway played a central role in the drafting of the text of Security Council resolution 1435. All of the members of the Council voted in favour of the resolution except for the USA, which abstained.

Once again the challenge will be to ensure that the Security Council’s demands are complied with. The Quartet, which is made up of the UN, the US, the EU and Russia, is playing a decisive role in this process.

The Quartet has recently adopted an outline for a peace plan that could lead to the creation of a Palestinian state in 2005. At the same time, the Quartet promised to draw up a more detailed plan with benchmarks and time-limits for the steps the parties are to take.

We are in close contact with all the members of the Quartet, and its efforts have our wholehearted support. As chair of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for Assistance to the Palestinians, we also coordinate our efforts with those of the Quartet. At the same time we maintain open and direct channels to all the parties involved.

The AHLC is playing a central role in the efforts to improve the humanitarian and economic situation in the Palestinian Area. According to the UN, every second Palestinian is dependent on food rations. At the same time child mortality and undernourishment are on the increase. We were already aware that more than half of the Palestinian people are jobless.

We are now working on arrangements for a meeting of the AHLC before the end of the year. We will also discuss our own assistance with the Palestinian authorities so that we can find the right balance between humanitarian measures and long-term development assistance.

A third important channel for the international efforts is the Task Force on Palestinian Reform, which is assisting the Palestinian authorities in their reform efforts. Norway is co-ordinating the Task Force’s activities in the Palestinian Area.

The Task Force was established after the Palestinian Authority adopted an ambitious reform programme this summer. This decision was an important step in the right direction considering that one of the lessons we have learned from the Oslo process is that the international community failed for a long time to attach enough importance to democracy and human rights on the Palestinian side. The reform programme is in keeping with the requests and demands that have subsequently been made by the international community.

Israel’s siege and destruction of President Arafat’s headquarters at the end of September have delayed the reform efforts. Nonetheless, the international community expects the efforts to continue, and we now see that the Palestinians have taken steps that demonstrate a willingness to continue this process. This is encouraging.

Even though the situation is serious, there is still hope. There is a general acceptance in the international community of the main elements in a prospective peace settlement. The PLO/PA have recognized the state of Israel. Successive Israeli governments, including the present one, have in principle accepted the creation of a Palestinian state.

Thus, the greatest challenge now is to revive the political dialogue between the parties. We are aware that the prospects of succeeding in this in the short term are poor. However, it is important to remember that this process has been a long one, and that it has been marked by both progress and setbacks. Therefore, we must not lose faith in the possibility of finding a solution, and persist in our efforts to assist the parties in finding one.

Mr. President,

More than ever before, the challenges we are facing in connection with the issues I have discussed today call for close international cohesion. The global coalition established in response to the gruesome terrorist attacks last year is a clear manifestation of our will to engage in joint action. Now it is important that we build on this cohesion. Only through joint efforts will we succeed.