Future challenges for NATO – A Norwegian perspective

Remarks by Political Adviser Ragnhild Mathisen at Preparatory seminar for NATOs Foreign Ministers meeting in Oslo, Oslo 16 April 2007.

The Norwegian government is a strong proponent for effective multilateralism. We make this clear in the way we contribute to international military operations. When we can choose, we prefer to contribute our resources through multilateral organisations rather than coalitions of the willing. Hence, priority is given to the UN and NATO.  As is the case for our effort in Afghanistan, where we chose to give priority to participation in ISAF over OEF.  

But, we are also realists. We understand that these multilateral organisations and institutions will not be used unless they are effective. The need for multinational organizations that can provide peace and stability is as great as ever. We therefore have to strengthen their ability to create conditions of security and growth in countries like Afghanistan.

NATO has shown remarkable durability and flexibility over the last couple of decades. Despite difficulties, NATO has managed to stay relevant under changing strategic circumstances.

NATO has many challenges. We are facing challenges in operations. We are facing challenges with regard to capability-development and in managing our relationships with other major organisations. And finally, we are facing a challenge in maintaining NATO as the primary forum for real transatlantic political consultations – to name a few.

In answering these challenges Norway’s main objective is clear. It is to continue to be an active and central player in transatlantic relations. A capable and relevant NATO is in Norway’s interest. It is also, I believe, in the interest of the international community.

NATO has made important contributions in enhancing security through its peace-making and peace-keeping efforts. In the Balkans and in Afghanistan we are engaged in securing and rebuilding war-torn societies in support of the United Nations. A strong international civil and military presence is necessary to stabilise failed states and prevent conflicts spreading.

Afghanistan is the Alliance’s first operation outside Europe. From its modest inception, ISAF has become the most demanding operation in NATO’s history. Its course will heavily influence the further development of the Alliance. We, meaning the international community, have made a commitment to Afghanistan. We must do what is in our power to ensure a positive development. 

One important lesson we have learned in Afghanistan is the clear need for improved civil-military co-ordination and an active use of all available resources – civil and military – to achieve results. There is no military solution alone to the challenges in Afghanistan.

But, reconstruction and development can not take place without the necessary level of security. Our military security operations are in vain if reconstruction and development do not follow. An overarching policy that captures all aspects should form the basis for NATO’s military contribution to operations. Norway has been an active proponent for this in NATO, and we now see a broad consensus on the need for a comprehensive approach.

In addition to improved co-ordination between civilian and military resources, there is also an obvious need to improve the co-ordination between the different civilian efforts. Today the civilian aspects of our engagements, in Afghanistan and elsewhere, are often fragmented and uncoordinated.

NATO remains the main venue for transatlantic consultation on security issues across the Atlantic. The past years’ tensions within the Alliance over issues like Iraq serve to underline the need to increase dialogue on a number of issues, beyond the traditional hard-security issues.

NATO has a special interest in forging close co-operation with the United Nations and the European Union. Not least with regard to the conduct of operations in an effective and comprehensive manner. Norway is an active supporter of enhanced NATO co-operation with the UN and the EU.

In addition, NATO should develop further its network of partnerships. Existing co-operative structures such as Partnership for Peace, the Mediterranean Dialogue and the Istanbul Co-operation Initiative should be developed further. NATO should also increase its efforts within areas such as Security Sector Reform.

NATO’s relationship with Russia will be increasingly important in the future. NATO should make use of the NATO Russia Council for open and free discussion, also on areas of diverging interests. Energy security, terrorism and proliferation are issues that require regular dialogue with Russia.

NATO is not, and should not become a global organisation. However, the Alliance should have a global perspective on security and also continue developing dialogue and partnership relations. These partnerships have an enduring value, contributing to stability, security and dialogue across the Euro-Atlantic area and beyond.

At the same time as NATO further evolves its capabilities with regard to political consultations and security sector reform - I believe it is necessary to keep in mind the basics, meaning collective security and Article V. NATO must remain relevant also with regard to the more traditional security challenges. Certainly for a number of the more recent Alliance-members the security guarantee implicit in Article V is a very important part of their considerations.

The final point I would like to mention is the international consequences of major shifts in the global distribution of power. As we set the direction for NATO’s further development we need to take a long term strategic perspective. As a minimum, the consequences of the increased influence of China and India must be taken into account. We also see that Russia is experiencing impressive economic growth. Russia is developing into a more confident player on the international arena.

I believe we are seeing the outline of a new multipolar global security system. This realisation should also guide NATO in its political consultations. In this new multipolar system, we need real transatlantic political consultations more than ever. Major changes in the international distribution of power entail dangers as well as opportunities.

NATO should develop a new Strategic Concept in the not to distant future - to take into account developments in the international system and new approaches to the use of military force. The Anniversary summit in 2009 should initiate this process. A new Concept will most likely not be a dramatic shift of direction. More likely it will echo much of the conceptual thoughts that served as the basis for the 1999-paper. But some of the issues I have mentioned will probably be more dominant. Issues like the continued development of NATO’s consultative functions and a stronger focus on cooperation with other organisations, not least the UN. There will probably also be an increased focus on the need for civil-military coherent efforts. But at the basis of it all is the continued relevance of collective security. The political dimension of NATO, including political consultations and dialogue, must be enhanced. And, we need to improve our performance in peace and stability operations.

Our Government believes in effective multilateralism. And we will work to strengthen multilateral co-operation. We do this because we are convinced of the necessity of co-operation. We do this because we believe it serves Norwegian interests and the interests of the international community. We will therefore continue to be an active proponent for necessary reform and development of the UN and NATO. 

Thank you for your attention.