Excellencies, dear friends

It is a pleasure for me to be addressing this gathering of ambassadors. It is indeed a rare gathering of so many prominencies in one room, at least here under the North Pole.

Today is a very special day for Norwegians. It’s the day we celebrate our constitution of 1814. That’s the official cause of celebration. But in addition to our proud constitution we pile all sorts of other good things on top: national independence, the end of the Second World War which meant end of occupation, the end of our long, dark and cold winter and the arrival of “the everlasting day of the Northern summer” to quote one of our novelists. For the kids in school—it’s the end of a long school year, and for the high school graduates—the end of obligatory school altogether. They might have some exams left to do, but don’t seem too worried about it. For the small children, those under 6 years of age and still at home or in kindergarden—I have three in that category—the 17 ^th> of May is a magic adventure. They might not grasp so easily concepts of freedom and independence, but they do grasp the concept of birthday. And the 17 ^th> of May is one big birthday. Norway’s birthday. They all understand that. It means unlimited quantities of icecream. It means that your parents will buy you big, colorful gas balloons. It means catching a glimpse of the king and the queen. I just dropped my kids off at their kindergarden, and I can tell you that the celebration is already well under way.

We are pleased that you have found the time and occasion to visit us around the time of our national day, to take part in this celebration, which of course also has a universal theme. After all, every nation celebrates its best moments, and the aspiration to live in freedom and peace is certainly universal. This is what the 17 ^th> of May is about.

This gathering is also an excellent opportunity for me to give a broad outline of Norwegian policies related to one of the biggest challenges of our time, namely poverty. Thus, my briefing today will dwell on some broad issues and challenges in the area of international development. My principal focus will be on the need to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. I will first, however, touch very briefly upon the situations in some countries high on the international agenda. I will start with the situation in Iraq.

(Iraq, Afghanistan, Sudan)

The situation in Iraq is still unstable, and the coalition forces are struggling to create law and order. We see it as extremely important that a representative interim Iraqi government be established as soon as possible. This is something which the Iraqi people both need, want and deserve. It will help bring about a more stable situation and will give ordinary Iraqis hope and trust in a better future. It can help facilitate the reestablishment of vital services. We also see it as necessary that the UN be provided a key role. The international community must jointly shoulder the responsibility of building the peace.

Norway has granted a total of around 60 million US dollars to humanitarian and reconstruction efforts in Iraq for 2003. Half of this has so far been channelled through UN agencies and NGOs to emergency relief operations. Our aid to Iraq is in line with the Government’s strategy for poverty eradication, which stresses the importance of humanitarian assistance not only during a conflict, but also in the post-conflict phase, when the civilian population is still vulnerable.

I would like to stress one important element concerning Iraq: The economic support to our long-term development partner countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America is not affected by the assistance to Iraq. This is important to us - and we stress the need to focus on the MDGs and poverty reduction as often as we can .

In Afghanistan much has been achieved, but there are still a lot of challenges ahead.

The security situation continues to be precarious and has even become worse. It is crucial that factional leaders and warlords are brought under the control of the central government. The implementation of reforms in the security sector is vital for sustainable political and economic development.

Time has come for the transitional government of Afghanistan [Transitional Authority??? ] to be provided the full opportunity to take full charge of the recovery and reconstruction efforts. The government under Hamid Karzai has made impressive progress and proven its ability to define its critical policy priorities. Now, the Afghan authorities must be allowed to take fully charge of its reconstruction and development agenda through a Consultative Group mechanism. The international community must not create another donors’ circus. We must all co-ordinate our support according to the established and sound Afghan priorities. With international attention first and foremost on Iraq for the moment, it is of crucial importance not to loose focus on Afghanistan.

Norway will be allocating NOK 375 million, or approximately USD 53 million, to Afghanistan in 2003, and we are redirecting the focus of our efforts from humanitarian to transitional and longer-term development assistance. Norway will continue to support the Afghan recurrent budget. It is vital for the Afghan Transitional Government to have a well functioning administration. Other development activites will be supported in accordance with Afghan priorities and other donors’ commitments.

My minister visited Kenya and Sudan late February, and both visits gave grounds for optimism. I understand it was encouraging to meet the newly elected government of Kenya and learn more about its ambitious agenda for fighting corruption and rebuilding the economy. Since then the government has adopted legislation which will enable the government to implement this agenda. I am pleased that the bilateral relations between our two countries are now back to normal and we intend to support the new Kenyan government in their efforts.

In Sudan, the Minister passed on a message from Prime Minister Bondevik to President al-Bashir announcing that we will be upgrading our bilateral relations. A chargé d’affairs is now in place in Khartoum. It is no secret that Sudan holds a special place on Norway’s agenda. Since 1998 Norway has been actively pursuing peace through close contacts with the parties, the IGAD negotiating team and other international observers. I am pleased to note that the international community is united in its support for the efforts being made by the parties and by IGAD. With the planned last phase of negotiations currently being held in Machakos in Kenya, hopefully we will soon be able to step up our joint assistance to a united Sudan at peace with itself and with equal opportunities for all.

Remaining in the Horn of Africa region, the emphasis of the international community is to keep the peace process between Ethiopia and Eritrea on track. Based on the international arbitration which has decided on the border between the two countries, the next phase would be for reconciliation to start: between the peoples of Ethiopia and Eritrea, and their governments. The peace must be reenforced and the two countries and their partners in the international community must together create a sound basis for development in the whole sub-region. Human rights must be respected. Norway remains committed to support such efforts.

Dwelling on Africa I am pleased to see a number of other positive developments, as in Madagascar and Mali where the governments are trying to tackle some major development challenges. We are now considering how Norway could better assist these countries in their efforts to combat poverty. Norway’s extensive cooperation with a number of African countries continues, with the same goal in front of us: of fighting poverty and building real human security. By the way, we welcome with great interest the report that has just been released by the Commission on Human Security, as well as the fresh and groundbreaking report from the World Bank on the relationship between economic exploitation of natural resources and war and conflict.

Needless to say, we are also strongly engaged in poverty eradication, peace and development in a number of other countries around the world. In Sri Lanka, for example, we continue to be very much engaged and important progress has been made by the parties. In Central America, governments are pursuing bold reform agendas and we are committed to continued support. The same is true in the Middle East, where the Palestinian Authority has been quick to accept the Road Map and key reforms are underway.

Let me now, however, turn your attention to some global issues.

(Poverty, MDGs, framework conditions)

President Jimmy Carter reminded the world from the Nobel podium last year that the gap between rich and poor is widening. He said, rightly, that this growing chasm is the single most important challenge of our time. Some simple facts illustrate this chasm all too clearly:

• 1.2 billion people live on less than a dollar a day.

• The richest 1 per cent of the world population earns as much per year as the poorest 57 per cent.

• 1.6 billion people have no access to electricity. Eighty per cent of these live in Africa and India.

• At the current rate of progress it will take 130 years to eradicate hunger in the world.

• The average Norwegian man can expect to live until he is 75 years old. The average man living in Mozambique or Angola can expect to live until he is 38 years old.

But in spite of these deplorable facts, the situation is not entirely dark. Politically, we hold it to be of utmost importance that the entire world, through the Millennium Development Goals, seem to have realized the severity of the situation. This is positive. Now we need to focus on implementation and we do not have a lot of time on our hands.

Let us refresh our memory: the MDGs state that, by 2015, the proportion of people living in extreme poverty and hunger and the proportion lacking clean drinking water must be halved. The ratio of children dying before the age of five must be reduced by two-thirds. The ratio of deaths among women giving birth must be reduced by 75 per cent. The spread of HIV/AIDS must be reversed. All children, girls as well as boys, must be offered primary education.

The MDGs have placed the interests of the poor and underprivileged at the top of the international political agenda. Heads of state, including the G8 leaders, cite them frequently, and are agreed that poverty is the greatest scourge of our time. They are saying that they will combat it by co-operation and by financial assistance. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a major breakthrough in international politics.

To achieve the MDGs and win the war on poverty, changes must be made and resources mobilised in at least four areas simultaneously.

Firstly, international framework conditions for debt reduction, trade and investment must be improved and made more supportive of the MDGs. We must ensure consistency and coherence between the goals the international community has set itself and the framework that same community is putting in place to achieve them. In the long run fair international framework conditions are crucial for ensuring sustainable development and freedom from poverty. The Doha round must realize its’ goal of being a development round - The important issues for developing countries must find a resolution.

Secondly, the poor countries themselves need to assign priorities, draw up strategies, invest in human resources and implement poverty-oriented policies. Good governance, democracy and human rights must be promoted in order to combat poverty and make development sustainable.

In this context, I would also like to mention briefly the issue of poor peoples’ rights; and in particular the issue of formal property rights. In many developing countries the informal sector is far larger than the formal one - and this has important repercussions on poor peoples’ ability to use actual, but not formally recognized, property in a productive way. The Institute for Liberty and Democracy in Peru - listed as the second most important think-thank in the world by the influential magazine TheEconomist - has estimated the total value of fixed property held but not formally owned by the poor in developing countries and former communist countries. Their conclusion is that un-recognized fixed property is approximately 20 times the total amount of foreign direct investment in developing countries between 1989 and 1999, and 93 times the amount of development assistance from OECD countries in the past 30 years.

Clearly, formalising property rights and by that integrating the informal sector into the formal is one of the challenges that developing countries and their partners have to address in their fight against poverty. These are also preconditions to attract investments and to make development assistance constructive. It is a fact that development assistance is most efficient in countries with good governance. In past couple of decades there’s been a lot of socalled structural adjustment in the developing world. The results have been mixed. Maybe the emphasis has been too narrowly focused on macroeconomics, of things that are mainly relevant to the formal part of the economy. But maybe it’s time to turn more attention to microeconomics and the needs for adjustment in that part of the economy where most people actually live and work. Of allowing these people to make their assets come to life through formalization of property and other assets. Interestingly enough, this insight is coming from many governments of developing countries, and is not driven by the IMF, the World Bank, and other donors as was largely the case with structural adjustment of the past. And that’s good.

Thirdly, ODA should be increased considerably. It actually needs to be doubled if we are to reach the MDGs. We also need to get more poverty reduction out of every dollar or euro, or krone. To achieve this we must improve our own ability to deliver assistance efficiently. This means harmonisation of donor-activities, gradual movement of effort from projects to programs, focus on recipient country ownership.

Fourthly, we must make a great effort to mobilise the private sector and the resources of civil society for the achievement of the MDGs. There is a lot of unexploited potential in these sectors. As mentioned, formalising the property rights of the poor in the informal sector is one of the means to generate resources for development and fighting poverty. Furthermore, entrepreneurs and agents of change must be given better framework conditions, and NGOs and the media must be strengthened so that they can fulfil their roles as watchdogs in democratic societies.

One very relevant tool from our side for promoting investment and private enterprise development in developing countries is the Norwegian Investment Fund for Developing Countries, NORFUND. The Fund is providing risk sharing and investment – directly or via local venture funds – for the development of businesses and private enterprises in developing countries. Thus NORFUND as an instrument for promoting private sector development in developing countries can make tangible contributions in our common endeavours for promoting economic growth and poverty reduction in poorer developing countries. This is also the conclusion in a recently published evaluation report of the fund.

(The MDGs and the Norwegian action plan to combat poverty)

In March last year the Norwegian Government launched an action plan to combat poverty in the South. The plan takes the MDGs as its main point of departure and outlines how Norway will contribute to their achievement.

The plan emphasises the close relationship between development assistance policy and policies in other areas such as debt, trade, investment, agriculture, the environment and energy. Policies in these areas can be seen as development policies because they influence the situation of poor people in poor countries. Thus, in order to effectively alleviate poverty in the South, our national policies must form a coherent whole.

Human rights must continue to be an integral part of Norwegian development policy in bilateral and multilateral fora. This is because the realisation of fundamental human rights is both an important goal in itself and because the fulfilment of these rights liberates forces that create and stimulate development. Thus realising human rights is a vital part of the development process itself.

For example, the right to education and the right the free expression are human rights and they should be promoted for precisely this reason. At the same time the realisation of these rights liberates forces that create and stimulate the human spirit, and therefore also economic development.

The action plan also stresses that capacity building for good governance will continue to be one of the most important areas for Norwegian development co-operation. In this connection the situation in our main partner countries is being assessed with a view to establishing a better basis for further assistance.

In many countries women are the heads of households. Women grow food for their families and play a pivotal role in the development processes. They run small businesses; they ensure that children get education and health care. This means that investing in women’s health and education and involving them in the productive sector is a particularly cost-effective way to promote development. Assisting women not only improves their social status and living conditions, it also improves that of their families. We urgently need to recognise women as the invaluable development resource they are, or could be, if given the chance - this continues to be reflected in our development policies.

Education is vital for development - this winter we launched a new plan to sharpen focus on education in development policies and pledged that support for education should amount to 15% of development aid.

The Norwegian government has pledged to increase its development assistance to 1 per cent of GNI by 2005. We now stand at 0.93 per cent. We have a little ways to go. We’re on our way. But it doesn’t make a huge dent in reducing poverty unless other industrialized countries also significantly increase their development assistance. Some are now moving in the right direction. But as a group we are still moving too slowly.

(Peace-building, GAP, terrorism)

A range of global conferences, from Rio in 1992 to Johannesburg in 2002, have highlighted the crucial links between three key UN goals: peace, sustainable development and human rights. This is certainly encouraging, but there is still a wide gap between rhetoric and reality, between promises and results on the ground. Peace is the major precondition for development. Without peace and stability, our fight against poverty is doomed to fail. Yet peace and human security remain an elusive proposition for far too many people.

Mass violence is usually a result of deliberate political decisions by leaders. Internal conflicts revolve around relations of power. They are often based on a perception of gross injustice or violations of rights. Violent conflicts are often protracted, persistent and difficult to resolve. They also have far-reaching consequences. About 6 million people were killed in intra-state conflicts during the 1990s.

Such conflicts, which affect so many thousands and millions of people, must be given due attention wherever they occur in the world. Although the media tend to deal with only one conflict at a time, the international community has an obligation to address human suffering everywhere.

One way of doing this is by mounting massive international humanitarian relief operations. These are commendable and, I would say, mandatory as an expression of solidarity. They save lives, relieve immediate suffering, and protect innocent people from harm. They do not, however, address the underlying structural causes of conflict. They do not prevent conflicts from breaking out again. And they divert resources from long-term sustainable development programmes.

Preventing the conflict from arising in the first place is, of course, preferable to healing the wounds, applying a cure and repairing the damage. The challenge for the international community is to be able to identify situations with a potential for conflict and to prevent them from breaking out or, in post-conflict situations, from re-occurring.

In addition to helping to prevent conflicts, the international community can assist in conflict resolution or, as I prefer to call it, peacemaking. The challenge is to facilitate political negotiations that will result in cease-fire agreements and peace accords. Norway has had the honour to be invited by the parties concerned to facilitate a number of peacemaking processes.

But getting the parties to the negotiating table and into a situation where they dare to opt for peace is the spectacular part of the story. The less exciting part is what must come afterwards in order to consolidate peace – namely peace-building by addressing social and economic development as well as political and security issues. I could speak for hours about the various aspects of peace-building, but time is short and I must move on.

Terrorism is a particularly serious form of violence with global implications. The possibility of terrorists gaining access to and using weapons of mass destruction is one of the most fundamental threats to our society, and should in itself be more than enough to ensure that all countries co-ordinate their efforts not only to fight terrorism, but also to prevent it.

The UN plays a key role in fighting and preventing terrorism. But the whole of the international community must work together in order to succeed, and in this endeavour it is vital to support the UN. Norway is doing its share and we will continue our fight against terrorism, both in military terms and in other ways, for instance through our efforts in Afghanistan. But we are also trying to prevent terrorism by combating the fundamental causes. And in this connection I would like to return to the three key UN goals: sustainable development, respect for human rights and the promotion of peace. Unless we strive to reach these goals I am afraid our joint fight against terrorism will in the long run be a futile one.

Trade is an important vehicle for economic growth and poverty alleviation – and a central element in our action plan for combating poverty. Clearly, we cannot achieve systematic and sustained poverty reduction without more trade and economic growth in the poorest countries. Measures for promoting trade must be included in developing countries’ own development strategies as well as in co-operation agreements with development partners.

The Doha Development Agenda of the WTO aims to improve market access for developing countries and enable them to participate more actively in the globalised world market. Transparent, multilateral rules are necessary to ensure a harmonised and predictable trading framework for all partners, and in particular for developing countries.

Improved market access for developing country products, in both developed and developing markets, is important for sustained economic growth and poverty reduction. Tariff reductions on a most favoured nation basis in the WTO will provide predictable market access for all countries. In addition the Generalised System of Preferences provides preferential access to developed country’s markets for many developing countries, in particular the least developed.

Norway granted duty- and quota-free access to the Norwegian market for the least developed countries as of 1 July last year. We are now providing increased technical assistance in order to build capacity and competence in these countries so that they can benefit from the new market opportunities in Norway and elsewhere.

Norway will also consider further improvements in market access for products of particular interest to developing countries – in particular agricultural products and textiles – through the WTO and the Generalised System of Preferences.

(WSSD follow-up)

In 2002 we witnessed a stronger commitment to North-South partnership than we have seen for more than a decade.

The Monterrey Consensus from the Financing for Development Conference, which took place year ago, showed that rich countries have now understood the importance of reducing and preferably eradicating poverty for global security and economic and social development. At Monterrey both the EU and the US signalled that they had concrete plans for stepping up their assistance. Other countries are now following a similar trend. The steady decline in the volume of development assistance has been reversed - but we need more.

Norway also had high ambitions for the Johannesburg Summit. We wanted to see an action-oriented plan with time-bound targets and poverty eradication as the overriding goal. We hoped to go to the Summit riding on a wave of international optimism. However, the international climate during those hectic months was not promising. The results of the summit fall short of what is needed to meet the challenges posed by environmental issues and poverty eradication. Nevertheless, given the complexity of the issues and the difficulties encountered during the negotiations, the results were better than we had feared.

We must realize that the significance of the Johannesburg Summit will depend on how it is followed up. Norway is prepared to assume its share of responsibility. We were happy to see our minister for environment, Børge Brende, elected to the chair of the CSD. We will try to use this as one of the tools to ensure that the Summit is followed up by concrete action to reduce poverty, change production and consumption patterns, and improve the management of natural resources. We cannot allow the process to lose momentum.

(It does not pay to ignore poverty and suppression.)

It is in everyone’s interest to fight poverty and to promote sustainable development, respect for human rights and durable peace. Secretary General Kofi Annan has made this point very eloquently:

“Either we help the outsiders in a globalised world out of a sense of moral obligation and enlightened self-interest, or we will find ourselves compelled to do so tomorrow, when their problems become our problems in a world without walls.”

In conclusion, I would stress that global challenges require global solutions and global efforts. There is no alternative to strengthening multilateralism. The UN is the only truly global forum for achieving a common, overarching vision. We must support the UN, we must help it to become more efficient and we must make sure that it can serve as the focal point of our efforts to improve our common future.

To get back to the opening subject of my small talk here: The United Nations is our best path to a global 17 ^th> of May. May that day come, someday, when children around the world can celebrate not just national birthdays, but also a bigger and more colorful global day of peace among all nations.

Thank you for your attention.