Norway's security outlook

Defence Minister of Norway, Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen. The Atlantic Council of Finland, 11th of May 2009.

Introduction
Finland and Norway enjoy a very close and fruitful relationship within the security and defence sector, and the relationship and cooperation is flourishing and has developed considerable over the last few years. This is not least  due to the fact that we share a common outlook on security challenges in our region. Both countries share a common border with Russia, and developments in the High North are important to both countries. The challenges we are faced with in the High North cannot be addressed by individual nations independently. We have to manage these through working together, and within a broader international framework.

Over the years, the Nordic cooperation has developed into a broad and well functioning cooperation in the defence sector. The Nordic states are natural partners for co-operation, based on common values, shared geography and culture. Also, the Nordic countries share a common outlook on international challenges and how to handle them, despite different institutional memberships and commitments in NATO and the EU.

Two important reports have recently outlined a range of areas in which the Nordic five can benefit from working closer together to ensure that we meet security challenges in a more effective way and to ensure a more cost effective use of our defence budgets. First, the report by the Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian chiefs of defence, and second the recent Stoltenberg report on enhanced Nordic cooperation in the security field.

The budget situation in most European countries, the current financial unrest, and the increasing cost of modern defence technology means that we cannot afford unnecessary duplication. Multi- or bilateral cooperation will therefore increasingly be necessary if we as relatively small countries are to have access to the strategic assets we need for the most demanding operations.

I therefore welcome your decision last week to procure “NASAMS” air defence system from the Norwegian supplier Kongsberg Defence & Aerospace (KDA). This is an important decision that will have a strong, positive impact on Finnish-Norwegian defence cooperation. Norway has been NASAMS-user for several years, and we are looking at how we can work more closely with Finland in areas such as training and logistics. I am also convinced that this will open up new possibilities for our two countries with regards to industrial cooperation.

Finnish-Norwegian cooperation in international peace support operations has traditionally been the cornerstone of our defence relationship. Our history of working together on the ground stretches back to  the UN-led operations in the late 1950’s.

And we have since then worked together in various NATO-, UN- and more recently also EU-led operations. Finland and Norway were the two driving forces behind the establishment of NORDCAPS (Nordic Coordinated Arrangements for Peace Support) in 1998, which aim is to strengthen Nordic cooperation within peace support operations.

Nordic Defence Cooperation
The scope and intensity of Nordic defence cooperation has increased considerably over the last few years.

For a variety of reasons the Nordic states are obvious partners for cooperation, despite our differences when it comes to membership of NATO and the EU.

Today, non-NATO members Sweden and Finland are both actively involved in NATO-led operations, while Norway participates in EU-led missions, even if we are not members of the EU. We contributed to the EU Nordic Battle Group in the first half of 2008, and we will contribute to this again in 2011. We will send one of our new frigates to the ESDP Operation Atalanta outside the coast of Somalia later this year, and we have also recently decided to double our contribution to the EU police mission in Afghanistan.

As Nordic neighbours we share a variety of security interests that we can best address together, and we share a common culture and approach which makes it easier for us to work together in operations abroad.

In Afghanistan the Nordic countries, and particularly Norway and Finland, have successfully worked together in various operations and on various tasks. And we hope to further strengthen this cooperation.

We have also pooled our resources in order to assist countries in the former Soviet area and the Western Balkans in their security sector reform processes. We are also initiating joint Nordic support to capacity building in Eastern Africa.

Norway and NATO
My goal is not in any way to tell Finland what to do regarding the politically important question of how you best can organize your relationship with NATO. Rather, I want to share our experiences and our thoughts on the future of this Alliance.

Norway was one of the founding members of NATO and the Alliance has been a cornerstone of Norwegian security since its origin. The Second World War taught us that neutrality could no longer address our security needs and that the logical solution was to join the alliance of western democracies, seeking protection under the collective defence clause. The world has changed several times since then, but NATO is still our primary security guarantor.

A month ago, we celebrated NATO’s 60-years anniversary with a Summit meeting on both sides of the Franco-German border. The meeting symbolized the historical origin of the Alliance, a hugely successful organisation, still highly relevant, still playing a crucial role for the security of its member states and working hard to extend security and stability also beyond Europe.

I believe the announcement of France to return to full participation in NATO’s defence planning and integrated military structures will serve to further strengthen the cohesion of the Alliance.

The most significant outputs from the Summit were in my mind the accession of Croatia and Albania, the broad agreement on the way forward in Afghanistan, the decision to normalize the relationship with Russia, and finally the Declaration on Alliance Security that formally sets the stage for the start of work on a new Strategic Concept for NATO. In addition, consensus was reached regarding the appointment of a new Secretary General, Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen. Fogh Rasmussen is actually the first Nordic representative to hold this position!  

The Strategic Context
Let us take a step back and take a broader look at the range of security challenges both our countries are faced with today. We are still faced with challenges stemming from intra-national, ethnic and religious conflicts.  In addition, the increasing pace of globalisation and its consequences, in terms of terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction are still highly relevant.

These so-called asymmetrical threats also include challenges like cyber threats and organised crime. In addition, environmental challenges with potential security implications, poverty and increased competition over strategic resources are becoming more apparent.

We are also witnessing new trends in the geopolitical landscape. China is emerging as an increasingly important power in world politics. Russia has re-emerged as a dominant regional power and an important voice in all current security matters. The steady rise of regional powers like India and Brazil is also an important part of this picture. From a global perspective, the relative economic and political power and influence of “the West” is declining in favour of Asia. The current global financial crisis is likely to further strengthen this trend, although most nations will be hit hard by its consequences.

One consequence of this new emphasis on geopolitics and great power relations is the renewed possibility for inter-state conflict.

In sum, we are facing a more complex security environment than ever before.

Strengthening the relevance of NATO
In spite of all these demanding challenges, there are reasons to be optimistic on behalf of the Alliance and transatlantic relations. The new American administration has brought optimism to the transatlantic cooperation after years of strain due to differences, primarily over Iraq. Obama’s administration has moved impressively fast to re-establish the pre-eminence of key universal values and norms as the basis of America’s foreign policy.

We also welcome the Obama administration’s stated willingness to engage in dialogue, also with one’s adversaries.  This is fully in line with Norway’s approach to international problem solving based on multilateralism.

From the Norwegian government’s perspective, it is important that NATO continues to be the main multilateral forum for dialogue between the US and Europe and the primary instrument for joint security and defence measures. I therefore believe that the Alliance must be more than just a “tool box” for military capabilities. NATO has illustrated time and again that it is just as much a political organisation and I expect this to continue in the 21st Century.

The last years have shown that there are a number of issues where NATO can contribute to broader solutions. In almost all thinkable future crisis management situations, the Alliance is going to work with others, be it the UN, the EU or the African Union. Hence inter-institutional links should be further developed, so that every organisation can do what it does best without unnecessary duplication of effort.

The Alliance has a mission “at home” as well as “away”. For understandable reasons, the “away” mission has dominated the agenda, not least because it has been perceived as more urgent than the long-standing commitment to collective defence. We think the time is ripe to readdress this balance.

Therefore, Norway initiated an important discussion in the Alliance last year, by highlighting the need for renewed focus on security challenges on NATO territory and in our neighbourhood. We believe that by responding to these concerns, public support for operations outside NATO territory will increase.

We believe that the Alliance should be the primary organisation for dealing with the full range of security issues for its member states. Norway therefore sees a need for NATO to raise its profile in relation to missions “at home” and to improve capabilities in that respect.

For this purpose, we presented a paper in the Alliance last Autumn with a number of proposals to meet security challenges in and around the NATO area. These proposals include reform of NATO headquarters and the command structure, improving geographical expertise and situational awareness, developing closer links between national- and NATO headquarters, re-introducing regional responsibilities to NATO commands, improve intelligence exchange and analysis, increase NATO involvement in training and exercises, and expand the role for Allied Command Transformation.

The High North
Let me now return to the High North. We could in the foreseeable future see the Arctic Ocean free of ice during summertime. This tells us that the global challenge of climate change needs to be addressed now through solid international cooperation and commitment. It also implies that reduced ice coverage combined with technological improvements may allow this region to become accessible to large-scale economic activity to a degree never experienced before.

So what are the security challenges in all this?

• First of all, there are existing and potential conflicts of interest in the area which could undermine the stability in the area. Our security policy aims to build confidence and prevent negative developments in the High North.
• Second, the Northern Fleet’s continued role in the Russian nuclear triad and the sheer weight of the Kola military infrastructure are of vital strategic importance to Russia.
• Third, the Barents Sea continues to be a training ground for military forces and a test bed for new weapon systems.
• Fourth, opening of new sea lines of communication will enhance the High North’s military-strategic significance.
• Fifth, the situation in the Arctic could be negatively affected by crises elsewhere.

Russia in the High North – cooperation or confrontation?
Russian foreign policy statements and strategy documents regularly emphasise the primary role of international law and multilateralism in international relations. This view also seems to be reflected in the new Russian Arctic strategy from 2008, where maintaining the Arctic as an area of peace and cooperation is highlighted as one of four main policy aims.

Russia is the only non-NATO member of the five Arctic Ocean states. It therefore seems reasonable to conclude that the state of High North security in the long run will be determined by the bilateral and multilateral interaction between Russia and the other states.

Over the last years, Russia has shown an increased willingness to engage in political rhetoric and even use of military force. The “zero-sum” approaches in Russian security thinking are a challenge for the West. This includes the increased tendency on the part of Russia to think in terms of geopolitical spheres of influence.

This political rhetoric has over the past couple of years been accompanied by the renewal of training sorties of strategic bombers across the Barents Sea into the Norwegian- and North Sea. There has also been an increase in naval exercise activity and deployments.

So, Russia is sending mixed signals. We nevertheless choose to be optimistic regarding future relations in the Arctic. The reason is simply that Russia and Norway have a shared interest in maintaining the High North as an area of cooperation and absence of military confrontation.

Still, we must maintain effective military forces in the north, and continue to cooperate actively with our most important Allies. This will ensure stability in the High North. Potential points of dispute exist, and the Kola military complex with its inherent activities will always be a factor in Russian-Norwegian relations.

A role for NATO in the High North?
So what about NATO? Is there a role for the Alliance in the High North?

Absolutely! NATO has a very important role to play and Norway has been arguing the case for a long time. The Alliance is at the core of the security and defence strategies of all but one Arctic Ocean state. It therefore cannot avoid defining its role in the area. The challenge will be to devise policies that address fundamental Western security interests, while at the same time recognising Russian concerns.

NATO already has a certain presence and plays a role in the High North today, primarily through the Integrated Air Defence System, including fighters on alert and AWACS surveillance flights. Some exercise activity under the NATO flag also takes place in Norway and Iceland, but to a large extent such activities are bilateral or multilateral by invitation.

We would like to see NATO raise its profile in the High North. Referring to the need for renewed focus on security challenges in and around Allied territory, regular activities in a NATO framework would demonstrate collective solidarity.

An increased NATO profile in the Arctic should be tailored not to unnecessarily provoke Russia, but to demonstrate Allied interest in the area. This could be done by establishing a presence sufficient to act as a stabilising factor in conceivable crisis scenarios and provide opportunities for interaction with Russian counterparts. Key words here would be confidence building, cooperative activities and the development of common procedures. Such a presence would not need to be permanent and threatening in the shape of military hardware and personnel, but should be linked to planned training activities, exercises and visits.

Another opportunity for the Alliance could be to actively search for arenas of cooperation with Russia. For example various security and safety challenges related to Arctic sea lines of communication could offer a wide field of areas of mutual benefit, including surveillance and patrolling.

Also, NATO should take a comprehensive approach to challenges in this area. We especially need to ensure that NATO develops a good working relationship with organisations like the Arctic Council, the UN, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) and the EU.

Concluding remarks
To conclude, NATO will continue to be the cornerstone of Norwegian security. I also believe the Alliance will remain the primary multilateral security forum for dialogue between the US and Europe.

It is important that NATO focuses both on the challenges facing us at strategic distances and at those confronting us closer to home. We regard this as a prerequisite to maintain the required political and public support in Allied member states.

The situation in the High North is at the top of the Norwegian government’s policy agenda. We believe the High North should be on NATO’s agenda and argues for an increased focus on this vital area of interest in the future. A more active role for the Alliance must balance the signal of solidarity with cooperation, and lay the ground for interaction with Russia. The challenge will be to devise policies that address fundamental Western security interests, while at the same time recognizing Russian concerns.

We consider Nordic defence cooperation to be an important supplement to our NATO-membership. A deepening Nordic defence cooperation, both between Norway and Finland and amongst all five Nordic countries, will be a flexible, pragmatic and functional arrangement designed to support our contribution to international organisations such as the EU, NATO and the UN. 

Finally, I would just like to underline that this speech do not give the complete picture regarding Norway’s security outlook. Due to time constraints I have opted to highlight areas of special importance for the High North and the Nordic co-operation. However, I am willing to use the Q & A session to also address questions related to the UN and our engagement in international operations, two very central dimensions of Norwegian security and defence policy.  

Thank you for your attention.