We are fortunate to have with us today John Palmer, an eminent observer of the Brussels scene for many years. Look forward to hearing his insider’s assessment of the Copenhagen European Council and its achievements.

And those achievements were of course numerous. Clearly, the Copenhagen Summit was a landmark event. It should go down in history as one of the European Union’s finest hours. And let me add that Copenhagen was the culmination of one of the most successful EU presidencies ever. Who said small states cannot make a difference in the EU?

Denmark just did.

Enlargement obviously is at the top of the list of Copenhagen achievements. In 18 months time, ten new member states will be joining the Union. At that point, most of Western and Central Europe will be part of the EU. And the unfounded charge that the Union is a rich man’s club can finally and definitely be put to rest.

EU enlargement is changing the political map of Europe. And it is hapening against the backdrop of NATO’s similarly historic decision to open its doors to seven new members, three of which used to be part of the former Soviet Union.

The last remnants of the East/West divide are finally being swept away. A new foundation has been laid for ensuring stability and building prosperity in our part of the world. The vision of a Europe whole and free is fast becoming reality.

And at the same time the European Union has sent yet another strong signal that enlargement is not a closed chapter. On the contrary, Copenhagen stated very forcefully that the doors of the EU will remain open to any European state that shares its values and fulfils the criteria.

The Union drove home that point by confirming its willingness to accept Bulgaria and Romania in 2007, by embracing Turkey as a potential future member, and by reaffirming the European perspective of the countries of the Western Balkans.

Think about it: In a few years – possibly by 2007 - the first of the new states that have emerged after the Balkan wars of the nineties may be joining the Union. As the Financial Times put it, “Not only is the Union erasing Europe’s cold war barriers, it is also addressing even older divisions between Catholic and Orthodox and between Christian and Muslim”.

And at the same time the Union is taking forward its relations with its New Neighbours following enlargement; Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, and Belarus, to name but a few. This is of particular importance from the Norwegian point of view.

Cross-border bilateral and regional cooperation with Russia is a high priority of ours. Hence, we note with particular interest the emphasis which the Copenhagen conclusions place on avoiding new dividing lines in Europe and eliminating instability at the external borders of the Union.

The Union’s Northern Dimension is highly significant in this regard. Norway contributes actively to its further development. We work closely with the Union to that end. Issues related to environmental hazards in the high north, as well as nuclear safety and non-proliferation, are particularly important to us. In January we will highlight these issues at a seminar in Brussels with participation by representatives of the European Commission and the European Parliament, as well as the member States.

Like all other European countries, Norway will benefit in a general political way from EU enlargement. Put very simply: Europe will be a safer and more prosperous place. And that is obviously in the fundamental interest of all Europeans.

But, of course, enlargement affects us in a more direct way, too. Enlargement of the EU also entails enlargement of the European Economic Area. We are gratified that there is agreement between the EEA/EFTA states and the Union side that enlargement of the EU and the EEA should be simultaneous, in order to safeguard the homogeneity of the Internal Market.

To that end, negotiations on EEA enlargement will commence in Brussels on January 9. The negotiators will be facing considerable time pressure. In order to ensure simultaneous enlargement, the negotiations will have to be concluded in three months, before the signature of the accession treaties of the new member states in Athens on April 16.

It is a tall order, but we are confident it can be done. Norway has consistently supported, in words and deeds, the enlargement of the EU. We are already contributing to bridging economic and social gaps in the EU, through the EEA financial mechanism as well as our own Action Plan for the Candidate Countries. And we have made clear that we are prepared to continue this support also after enlargement.

But the level of the Norwegian support will have to be reasonable. We cannot see any justification for the idea that the contributions of the EEA/EFTA countries should be comparable to those of the member states.

Third countries do not enjoy the same rights and privileges as member states. And in defining the level of contributions, account must be taken of the total economic implications of enlargement for the EEA/EFTA states, including reduced or impaired market access in specific areas.

In this context, our point of departure is that enlargement is about the removal of barriers in Europe, not the erection of new ones. From our point of view it is essential to avoid new obstacles to trade. What we are asking is compensation for the loss of free trade in fish with the new EU members; no more, no less.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Yet another area where the outcome of Copenhagen impacts directly on Norwegian interests is the security and defense relationship between the European Union and NATO. In the margin of the Summit, a break-through was achieved in the long-deadlocked question of the EU’s access to NATO resources and structures in the context of crisis-management operations under EU auspices.

Norway has consistently supported a stronger European role in crisis management. Therefore we have welcomed the emergence of a European Security and Defense Policy. And we have indicated that 3500 Norwegian troops and 80 police officers would be available for peace operations in the context of the ESDP.

We are currently in the process of putting together an integrated package of resources and personnel that can be drawn upon in civilian crisis management operations, under the auspices of the EU as well as the UN or the OSCE. In addition to police operations, this package will include the other links in the judiciary chain.

In past peace operations, for instance the one in Kosovo, we have seen that lack of judges, prosecutors, and prison officials has been a real and serious obstacle to progress. We will be working closely with our EU colleagues to further develop this integrated approach to civilian crisis management.

Norway sees the ESDP as a supplement to, and not as a replacement for, NATO. It will add to the total crisis management capability at the disposal of the international community. But it is crucial that the ESDP evolves in harmony between the EU and NATO.

The Copenhagen break-through significantly lowers the risk of wasteful competition and duplication of efforts. The EU now will have access to NATO planning and military resources for missions independent of NATO, provided that the Alliance does not itself want to take the lead.

Hence, the way should now be paved for a real strategic partnership and a constructive division of labour between NATO and the EU.

That is good news for Europe. EU-NATO cooperation has already shown its potential. By working together, the two organizations were instrumental in bringing Macedonia back from the brink of a bloody civil war.

The deadlock over access to NATO resources has led to stagnation in the development of the ESDP. Now that obstacle has been removed.

The EU will be taking over the UN’s police operation in Bosnia at the turn of the year. Early next year the EU is poised to replace NATO’s military mission in Macedonia. And at Copenhagen, EU leaders signaled that the Union is also ready to take responsibility for the considerably larger military mission in Bosnia.

Norway supports a more substantive role for the EU in the Balkans, on the basis of a permanent agreement with NATO. We are contributing personnel to the police operation in Bosnia and are ready to do so in regards the military missions in Macedonia and Bosnia.

But if the EU-NATO relationship is to function smoothly, it remains singularly important that non-EU NATO members such as Norway are able to participate meaningfully at all stages of the planning of EU-led missions. And it will be critical to ensure that the United States remains politically engaged in the Balkans, even after the EU has assumed the main operative responsibility.

As Danish foreign minister Per Stig Møller put it in Copenhagen:

“The ties that unite the EU and the US are far more important than issues that divide. This applies to an even higher degree after the historic enlargement”.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Copenhagen demonstrated the dynamic character of the European Union and consolidated its status as the primary political actor on the European continent. Europe is changing more dramatically than anybody could have imagined only a few years ago.

We in Norway cannot remain aloof or unaffected by these changes. Closing our eyes is not an option. From this perspective, the growing debate about European issues is encouraging in and of itself.

As of now, the fundamentals of our European policy remain unchanged. The EEA Agreement continues to be its cornerstone. The recent parliamentary debate on the Government’s White Paper on the EEA confirmed that there is broad parliamentary agreement on this. The EEA Agreement is a good agreement, but it has its limitations, and those limitations are becoming ever more apparent.

Recent opinion polls indicate that public perceptions of the Union are changing, and that support for Norwegian membership is growing. But it is too early to draw hard and fast conclusions from this. For the time being the membership issue as such is not on the political agenda.

It is hard to see that this could change before the 2005 Storting elections. But to this I would hasten to add that, from the point of view of the party that I represent, the question is not whether the membership issue will be reopened, but when.

In the meantime the debate must go on. More than ever we must keep watch of developments in the European Union. Our interests will be affected, one way or the other.

That is true with regard to enlargement, but it equally applies to the ongoing process of institutional reform that seems likely to result in a Constitutional Treaty. And it is true with regard to reform of the Common Fisheries Policy of the EU, which we hope will contribute to ensuring more sustainable fisheries, in keeping with the proposals of Commissioner Fischler.

More examples could be added on. But the ones I have already mentioned should suffice to illustrate the basic point that keeping track of developments inside the EU is indispensable if we are to protect Norwegian interests. That is why we have invited John Palmer here today. And that is why we are planning a conference on the evolution of the EU’s fisheries policy and its implications for Norway in Tromsø next March.

Ladies and gentlemen,

I’ll leave it at that. I take great pleasure in turning the floor over to the man you really came to hear today, John Palmer.