“Most is north” The High North and the way ahead – an international perspective

Check against delivery/video recording

Translation from the Norwegian

 

Illustration: title slide

Rector Aarbakke, ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for your kind words, Rector, for the invitation to speak here and for the warm welcome you have all given me.

It means something very special to me to be back here at the University of Tromsø to speak about the High North. Most of all because the High North is the Government’s number one foreign policy priority, as it has been every single day since 17 October 2005. But also because my experience of this auditorium on 10 November 2005 is among my finest memories from my life as a politician. It was my first opportunity to speak about the visions behind our High North policy, what we envisaged, and why this policy was so important for North Norway and for the country as a whole.

This is also why I have been looking forward to this opportunity to take stock and look ahead – to determine where we are now and where we want our efforts to take us. This policy cannot be implemented by a single government office, a single mayor, municipality or county, a single company or research institution, a single theatre stage. It must be implemented by all of them – and by many other actors.

*****

And in addition, this week has been historic – for Norway, Russia and the High North, and therefore also for our High North policy.

After 40 years of negotiations, the Norwegian and Russian negotiators reached agreement on the maritime delimitation line. Norway and Russia have been at peace with each other for a thousand years and have had an established land border since 1826. We will now at last have a delimitation line between our sea areas and continental shelves. It was high time. So we have good reason to be pleased.

Norway and Russia are demonstrating what can be achieved when we pull in the same direction, when we trust each other sufficiently to conclude an agreement, when we take the time to envisage what opportunities a new paradigm of cooperation can generate.

Finding a solution to the issue of maritime delimitation has been a clear objective of the Government’s High North policy. We have now fulfilled this objective. But we will not stop here. Seen in a historical perspective, this agreement – together with everything we have achieved in the past few years – is the start of an era of development and value creation for generations to come.

We must remember that the delimitation line itself does not generate value. It is people’s work that creates value. It is our ability to motivate, organise and realise opportunities for value creation that have the potential to provide a new boost in the north.

*****

My message today is the following, my friends: pulling in the same direction can unleash great potential.

Let me repeat what I said then, in 2005: our High North Strategy will only be successful if we pull in the same direction, if we resist the petty temptation of reaping short-term gains by turning against each other – northern Norway against southern Norway, county against county, east against west within counties, public sector against private sector, industry against industry.

We know that these perspectives appear in the story of Norway from time to time. But we also know other elements of this story: the ability to stand united behind a vision – a story of development, employment, welfare and culture, a story of solidarity and common effort. Examples include the reconstruction following the Second World War, the creation of the Norwegian welfare society, the development of the petroleum industry.

It is all about pulling in the same direction. This complex task is so important, so inspiring and so feasible! We can decide to let our efforts in the High North become a new chapter in this story.

 

Illustration: lines from the poem “North” against a background of a road in Lofoten

Dear friends,

I will use our time here together this afternoon to take you on a journey through our High North Strategy, to tell you the story – of the past, the present and what lies ahead of us. It is a story that has been influenced by one of my great sources of inspiration: Rolf Jacobsen’s well-known poem that contains the line “Most is north”. It was published in 1985, in the anthology Nattåpent, when the poet was 78 years old. He expresses a profound sense of experience and a tempered view of the world, and he puts into words what we are all doing now – now only we Norwegians, but the whole world: “Look north more often.”

The potted version of the story of the High North is as follows:

·         Firstly, the High North is the Government’s number one foreign policy priority. This is the part of Norway’s neighbouring areas where most change is taking place, where we have the most interests to safeguard, and where we have both a responsibility and the ability to make a difference.

·         Secondly, our strategy will be successful if we manage to foster the cooperation that must characterise a policy for the 21st century. It requires the ability to look across sectors, to cooperate across the public and private sectors, to further develop cooperation with other countries and to enter into new forms of cooperation and new partnerships.

·         Thirdly, our strategy will be successful if we are able to update our mindsets. We must learn from history, but at the same time we need to adapt our established patterns of thought. We have learned to interpret signs of good and bad weather, but we must also have the confidence needed to adjust our course so that we can see a friend where we once saw an enemy, a potential where we once saw a danger, an opportunity where we once saw a problem.

 

Over the past four or five years we have taken important steps in this direction.

We have taken on a leading role internationally. Now people associate the concept of the High North with Norway.

We have launched measures that are being implemented through national and regional plans and budgets. We have made use of extensive dialogue and a plethora of contacts in drawing up a road map for our future efforts. The most important elements are summed in the report New Building Blocks in the North, which we presented in Tromsø just over a year ago.

 

Illustration: New Building Blocks in the North

We are now making use of these building blocks, one by one. We are delivering on the objectives we have set ourselves, step by step. One of these objectives was reached last Tuesday, when we reached agreement on the delimitation line. I am still responsible for coordinating our High North policy. There is no single minister that is responsible for the High North. All of my colleagues in the government can therefore be considered to be “ministers for the High North” within their respective fields.

It is stimulating and rewarding to work in this vast policy area. Through these years I have been accompanied by the interest and enthusiasm of the people in North Norway in particular, but also of people in other parts of the country – including in the Oslo Labour Party, which I myself belong to – and even of people abroad, including colleagues, the media and interested forums. I must admit that I have sometimes wondered whether I made the right choice a few years ago, and I have kept a cutting of an article in the newspaper Nordlys, in which I was encouraged to stand for the Troms Labour Party in the parliamentary elections. Did I make the right choice? I have concluded that just as it is possible to focus on two thoughts at the same time, it must be possible to have two objects of affection in one’s heart at the same time.

When I look back, I see that we have come far. I see that our vision is being filled with content, piece by piece – as is the case for all social development. But history is never all linear and harmonious. Change triggers debate and counterforces. It is the task of the opposition to look for shortcomings. That is how our democracy works.

I have also been accompanied by an impatience for results and breakthroughs. That is quite natural, because the northernmost part of Norway, despite all its opportunities, faces huge challenges as well. These include the great distances, the deteriorating state of the schools, the loss of working-age population and a poorly diversified economy.

I face a barrage of questions that are way beyond my area of responsibility – together with proposals, complaints and demands. If I ever feel overwhelmed by them, I try to think that a politician should never complain about people having high expectations. Just imagine what the opposite would be like!

I remember Thorvald Stoltenberg’s words about the Barents Cooperation, which I quoted here in 2005: “The idea is that the people who live in the region should come up with the ideas and be the driving force of the cooperation.”

And that is just how it is. Let me give you one example. We have nearly reached agreement on the introduction of a border resident ID card, which will simplify travel across the Norwegian-Russian border, creating an area of local cross-border traffic. This is the result of numerous proposals from people in the border areas, as I was able to point out in Sør-Varanger yesterday – and this morning.

 

Illustration: school children

I would like to recall something I have mentioned many times since 2005: our High North Strategy is not a three-month project, nor an initiative for the next budget year; it is – as the Rector said – a project with a time horizon of generations. It is the development of a modern society.

Value creation in the north is not achieved by means that are essentially different from those that apply in other parts of the country. It is a question of combining knowledge, resources, labour and capital – ideas, people and money. It is about hard work. About bold, but feasible plans. About cooperation.

It is also a question of providing favourable conditions. For instance by establishing a maritime delimitation line. Without such a boundary, the opportunities for cooperation are negligible. Once a boundary is established, there is no end to what we can cooperate on.

But opportunities are not created by a single government decision, a single allocation or the discovery of a single oil and gas field. We must not expect someone else to come up with the solution. We must give each other the trust, inspiration and space to unleash the many forces that need to pull in the same direction in order to make a difference.

Yesterday’s front page of the newspaper Nordlys quoted Hans Olav Karde of SpareBank1 saying: “Now it is all up to us”. That is true, but Mr Karde and everybody else can rest assured that the government authorities will do their part. However, I agree with Mr Karde when he says: “It is definitively not the job of the Prime Minister or Foreign Minister to come up here to establish companies that can trade with Russia. That is our job.”

That is well put. But success here – in establishing new business activities and trading with Russia – places new demands on our cooperation. It requires that we go beyond the beaten track.

This is a challenge to everybody in our country, and here I naturally include the government authorities.

 

Illustration (film): upside-down perspective (Google Earth)

Dear friends,

It is possible to split up our High North policy into all kinds of policy areas. It is possible to divide it into a series of specific major and minor issues and questions. But I want to focus on the larger story. We need it in order to see where the individual issues fit in. We need it to illustrate the critical elements in modern value creation, how we can come up with the necessary labour, capital and knowledge.

Let me therefore start by identifying some long-term trends – for we are writing history. We are often unable to see the larger developments as they take place. We need to have them at a distance to see them. As a wise man once put it, major change comes stealthily. It is only in retrospect that we can determine that something really was a new development, a shift, a change. It is only then we can identify which events were truly driving forces of history.

 

I have often spoken about the three driving forces of this story.

First, there is Russia.

Illustration: Russia

Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. Now we see more clearly what a fundamental change this has caused, although there was increasing openness in the final years of the Soviet Union. In 1987 President Gorbachev proposed turning the High North into an area of cooperation. He was in favour of international cooperation on the use of resources and research, and he wanted to open the Northern Sea Route to international traffic.

For nearly 20 years we have lived with a neighbour who has suffered regime collapse, great instability and changes in social and governance structures. It is no wonder that it has taken time to reach agreement on the delimitation line. Russian society has – sometimes hesitatingly, sometimes ruthlessly – been seeking a new order, a sense of what Russia is and where the country is headed.

In a historical perspective we – Norway and Russia – are still in a phase of “rediscovering” each other. The border where East met West, the border where NATO faced the Warsaw Pact, is now the border between the neighbouring people of Norway and Russia. On Tuesday we showed the world how good neighbours resolve border disputes: by means of peaceful negotiation, firmly based on modern principles of international law. So, Russia is one of the driving forces.

 

The second driving force is climate change.

Illustration: climate change

The High North offers a front-row seat for observing climate change. We see that the ice is melting. We see that maritime traffic along our coast is increasing. We can virtually hear the ships passing. (True, Jan Gunnar Winther, so far not the sound of a research vessel, but of many others.) But that fact that we have a front-row seat does not mean that we are passive observers.

The message here is a dramatic one. It is in the north we are getting the strongest reminders of why the world needs to act to address climate change. We bring this knowledge with us to the international conferences, meetings and groups of experts we participate in. We are seeing a growing awareness of how a warmer climate will affect human activity – creating new challenges and opportunities – particularly for the coastal states in the north. And for the indigenous peoples.

If you searched for “Arctic Ocean” on the Internet a few years ago, most of the hits would be about ice and the courageous exploits of Arctic explorers. Now it is becoming a new focus of interest, both for states and for the public. It is still remote, and it still contains a lot of ice, but it is now of central importance for coastal states that have responsibilities and rights here. It is also attracting the attention of a number of other states that are concerned about geopolitics, research and safeguarding their own interests.

 

The third driving force is resources.

Illustration: resources (Melkøya/Snøhvit)

There are both renewable and non-renewable resources. There are resources that we know exist, and that we are already harvesting, such as fish. Then there are resources we have knowledge of, presume exist or are engaged in research on, for example in the field of marine bioprospecting. Some resources are accessible to states and individuals, and the harvesting of these must be regulated and controlled. Other resources have previously been out of reach, but are now becoming accessible and are therefore attracting attention, such as oil and gas.

 

Illustration: the three pictures combined

If we combine these three driving forces – resources, climate and Russia – we see why the High North is a strategic priority area for Norway. It affects the lives and activities of people in the north. It is important for the whole country, but obviously particularly for the northern part. As Rolf Jacobsen put it: “This land is long. Most is north.”

Take a look at this, and you’ll see the story behind our efforts in the High North. You will see that it provides certain guidelines for our policy. Let me mention the three that have been most important since 2005 and that still guide our way ahead.

First, we must develop our neighbourly relations with Russia. We must continue what we have been doing so successfully, namely living side by side with a big, complex neighbour – seeking cooperation and common opportunities, but at the same time adhering to our principles and democratic values, and remaining firmly anchored in our alliance with our European and transatlantic partners.

Second, we must take the responsibility we have as a coastal state as new shipping routes open and maritime traffic increases. This gives us not only opportunities, but also a great responsibility. Some of the keywords here are maritime monitoring, search and rescue, promotion of an international maritime legal order and protection of the unique and vulnerable environment.

Third, we aim to be at the forefront of sound resource management. The renewable resources must be harvested responsibly. We have had them off our coasts for centuries, and we must ensure that they remain there long after the petroleum age has drawn to a close. Non-renewable resources such as oil, gas and minerals must be exploited taking necessary care of the vulnerable Arctic environment.

These are the three driving forces of our High North Strategy.

So what is our inspiration for making Norway the leading actor as the story continues? The desire to make a difference.

From the very first day we started focusing on the High North, we identified three key elements: presence, activity and knowledge.

 

Illustration: three pictures illustrating presence, activity and knowledge (Hammerfest, Kimek, Bodø University College)

Presence: Presence is about settlement patterns and being present in all parts of the High North.

Activity: Norway aims to take a leading role in activities that set the parameters for value creation and life in the north – ranging from business, research and culture to engagement in the international arena and regional and global diplomacy.

Knowledge: Knowledge is at the core of our High North Strategy, and the University of Tromsø, where we are now gathered, plays a key role here. We must aim to be the leading knowledge nation in the north. We need knowledge about nature, the environment, resources, new and existing economic activities, geopolitics – knowledge that can provide a basis for new industries and increase value creation in existing industries.

In short, Norway must be prepared, and must formulate its policy, strategy and vision ahead of developments, not after they have taken place. Our country may rank as small on a list of the world’s nations ordered according to size or population, but it is big when it comes to anything that has to do with coasts, oceans and continental shelves, and on these matters Norway must be in the forefront.

 

Dear friends,

Let us continue our journey by taking a look at the map of the High North and the Arctic – at the geography, the borders and boundaries – the framework for our High North policy. I believe that our ability to create value and share it fairly – our ability to pull together – depends on our awareness of both the story and the political framework we define.

 

Illustration (film): panning over the High North (Google Earth)

My perspective is that of the Foreign Minister. If you invite other ministers, you will discover that they also see parts of their portfolios in a clear High North perspective.

In our foreign policy, the High North has been defined as the Government’s most important strategic priority area.

We have not made a precise geographic definition of the High North. To me, it is primarily a political concept, a politically defined set of ambitions.

What is clear is that we are talking about the northernmost part of Europe. In a Norwegian perspective, the term “High North” is generally used for the northernmost parts of Norway and our neighbouring areas, i.e. northwestern Russia and the counties in the Barents region, while it is more usual to use the term “Arctic” when the focus is on more specifically Arctic matters, for instance related to the Arctic Ocean and the Arctic Rim.

A great deal of progress has been made in this important area in the past five years. We now see how these areas – the High North and the Arctic – form a whole, and that the principles of international law and our concept of a legal order are applicable to both.

In countries like Canada and Russia, no distinction is made between the High North and the Arctic. It is strange to think that there are more people living in Troms county alone than there are in the vast area of Canada north of 60o N, which is the same latitude as Oslo.

However, borders and international law are important precisely because they define framework conditions.

Two of the most important contributions we have made in recent years have been establishing our borders in the north and establishing a legal framework for the Arctic.

 

Illustrations: maps (lines, seven steps)

Let me begin with our own borders: In 2005 there were many dashed lines on the map of the sea areas in our northern waters, i.e. lines indicating maritime boundaries that were not yet finally established, even though they were respected. These ranged from less well known boundaries in the west, to the best known of them all – the dashed line marking the disputed area between Norway and Russia.

We have now drawn the lines.

In 2006 we entered into an agreement with Denmark and the Home rule Government of Greenland on the delimitation of the continental shelf and the fisheries zones in the area between Svalbard and Greenland.

Later that year, we reached agreement with Iceland and the Faroe Islands on the delimitation of our respective continental shelves outside 200 nautical miles in the southern part of the Banana Hole of the Northeast Atlantic, provided that all three document continental shelf in the area to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in New York.

In 2007, we concluded an agreement with Russia on maritime delimitation in the Varangerfjord area.

 

Illustration: the new map (the maritime delimitation line)

And then last Tuesday – on 27 April 2010 – the Norwegian and Russian negotiating delegations reached agreement on a maritime delimitation line in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean.

The solution involves a maritime delimitation line that divides the overall disputed area of about 175 000 square kilometres in two parts of approximately the same size. The line has been computed in relation to the relevant coasts on either side, on the basis of modern principles of international law. I can testify to the fact that it takes time to draw such a line.

The draft agreement, which will be signed before it is put before the two countries’ national assemblies for approval, also includes provisions on cooperation in the fisheries and petroleum sectors.

My message to the fisheries communities in both countries is clear: our close, excellent cooperation on fisheries management, which has functioned so well for so many years, will continue. This means that the agreements concluded in the 1970s with what was then the Soviet Union, the Norwegian-Russian Joint Fisheries Commission, establishing quotas, close seasons, regulation of fisheries, mesh sizes, etc., will all continue. This is a success story in global terms. These fish stocks are also among the most valuable, and the healthiest, in the world. As for the petroleum sector, the draft agreement has detailed rules and procedures for dealing with any oil or gas deposits that should extend across the delimitation line, similar to those we have experience of from the North Sea.

And when can we get started on all of this? We must move ahead quickly, yet wisely.

First the matter must be put before our respective parliaments, the Storting and the Duma. Then we must consider desired progression, as we have been doing along the coast ever since the 1970s, striking a sound balance between petroleum activities, fisheries and the environment.

This opens up new prospects for cooperation and development in the north on resources, business activity, jobs, knowledge and welfare.

The absence of a boundary has been a constraint. Establishing a delimitation line opens up new opportunities.

Some are saying – even after agreement on the delimitation line was announced on Tuesday – that we ought to close the oil and gas chapter now, that the fields we have developed further south are enough. In my view, this would be wrong, ahistorical and unwise. Now it is North Norway’s turn. It is a national responsibility to make this possible. Actors in this part of Norway must seize the opportunities that lie ahead.

The outer limit of Norway’s continental shelf has now been clarified, which means that we have defined the part of the seabed over which Norway has jurisdiction. These are not areas we have simply helped ourselves to, as some have claimed. All coastal states automatically have a continental shelf that extends out to 200 nautical miles from the baselines, and also beyond that if the shelf extends further. We have documented the extent of our continental shelf outside 200 nautical miles in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In April 2009, i.e. a year ago, we were the first Arctic coastal state to have our data approved by the Continental Shelf Commission.

Thus, we have established the size of modern Norway, including Svalbard and Jan Mayen, whose land area measures 385 000 square kilometres. When we add the continental shelf as it has now been defined, we get a total of 2 660 000 square kilometres.

Some have jokingly said that Norway has got bigger. This is an exaggeration. With all due respect, the seabed and the continental shelf have been there since time immemorial. What we have done is to bring modern Norway in line with the existing legal order. This is important. And it is in accordance with our rights and responsibilities under international law.

 

Illustration: the Ministers at Ilulissat, Greenland

But then we have the Arctic Ocean. It was not included when I spoke here in 2005, but it is now. Note that the delimitation line we have reached agreement on is in the Barents Sea – and the Arctic Ocean, no less.

What rules apply there? Is this uncharted territory where it is urgent for countries to assert themselves? Where they can plant flags on the seabed and claim territory?

I have heard this question many times in recent years, but more and more rarely because Norway, Russia and the other coastal states have taken responsibility and clarified this uncertainty.

We have confirmed what should be a matter of course: that the law of the sea applies in the Arctic Ocean. The Arctic Ocean is an ocean legal terms, even though it is covered in ice. The coastal states bordering on the Arctic Ocean – Norway, Russia, the US, Canada and Denmark, including Greenland – agree that the maritime borders in the north are to be drawn in accordance with the international law of the sea.

Ivan Kristoffersen was right when he wrote in the newspaper Nordlys last week that security policy is the policy pursued by states in peacetime. And that the agreement the foreign ministers of these coastal states have confirmed on two occasions – in Ilulissat in June 2008 and in Ottawa in March 2010 – is a contribution to modern security policy.

The agreement reached between Norway and Russia must also be viewed in this perspective.

But we have to keep up steam, for even though the law of the sea applies here, new rules and regulations are needed to deal with the increase in human activity. A new, big agenda is emerging: cooperation on new shipping lanes – for example, how far from the coast should ships be allowed to sail. And the Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-Covered Waters, i.e. binding rules for the design and equipment of ships operating in polar waters, may be in place in 2012.

 

Illustration: search and rescue, an ice-covered ship

It is also important to establish arrangements for search and rescue in such a large and at times hostile sea area. A working group under the Arctic Council is working on a search and rescue agreement, and we hope to make considerable progress on this at the next meeting, which will be in Oslo in June.

Maritime surveillance is another challenge. We know little about what this involves. At present we have both military and civilian arrangements for monitoring traffic along our long coastline. But is this good enough?

 

Illustration: Barents Watch

The Government has begun work on the project Barents Watch – an integrated maritime surveillance system – in order to monitor the situation in these areas at all times. This will provide us with real-time information about the environment, weather conditions, marine resources and human activity.

We are now working together with more than 20 Norwegian institutions on planning an integrated Norwegian system. The project is headed by a board, assisted by a separate secretariat. In the course of this year, we will assess what should be included in Barents Watch as well as the question of costs. The Government will then take a decision on how to proceed. One thing that is certain is that we must draw on existing centres of expertise, such as those here in Tromsø, where there are many views on this matter, and service centres along the coast that are engaged in surveillance today. I had an opportunity to visit the Vessel Traffic Service Centre in Vardø last autumn, and I was impressed by what they have achieved there.

 

Illustration: the logo of the Arctic Council

The Arctic and the Arctic Ocean are playing a more central role. Therefore it is essential that the countries in the area have arrangements for cooperating on matters relating to this region.

This is where the Arctic Council comes in. It is made up of the five coastal states and the other Nordic countries. The work of the Arctic Council is producing tangible results, as we experienced during the three years we held the chairmanship, which culminated in the ministerial meeting here in Tromsø last autumn.

The research and studies on global climate change for which the Arctic Council has taken the initiative have been of major importance for the conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

We continue to collect information on climate change in the Arctic, for example on the retreat of sea ice, the melting of the Greenland ice sheet and the reduction in permafrost and snow cover. We all notice the changes, but they are particularly noticeable to the indigenous peoples in the area, whose livelihoods are being affected. But our findings are causing alarm, because melting ice in the Arctic is a harbinger of flooding in the Caribbean and drought in Chad – even though it is in the middle of Africa.

 

Illustration: map showing the eight Arctic Council member states

The indigenous dimension has been given its rightful place in the Arctic cooperation, with representatives of indigenous groups being given the status as permanent participants. Securing their position must be an integral part of our High North policy. I am pleased that the joint Nordic Sami Council is participating actively in the Arctic Council. When I speak in the Arctic Council, I generally use six of the 10 minutes’ speaking time allotted to Norway, while the Sami representative in our delegation uses the last four. This is a fine tradition.

In other words, Arctic cooperation has been consolidated, updated and honed in the last few years. Now it is equipped to meet the challenges in the years ahead. And we, as states, must be prepared to deal with the sharp increase in international interest in the Arctic, for example that being shown by Asian countries such as China, Japan, India and South Korea. The situation in the Arctic is of global interest, and these countries have legitimate interests in the region.

 

Illustration: shipping lanes

In particular, we need resources that can be mobilised for research.

The business interests that are attracted to this region are likely to be international.

The future users of the Northern Sea Route – which is drawn in on this map – will be global actors. The large Asian economies, with their huge export and import volumes, are positioning themselves. Where we see that shorter maritime transport routes could result in time savings of up to 40% between Rotterdam and Yokohama, it is obvious that Asian countries see this from their perspective, i.e. that transport routes to Europe will become shorter. And all this traffic will pass along our coast. We need to be prepared.

I got a clear impression of how this scenario is approaching at the seminar I attended in Kirkenes this morning. The participants included Russian and Norwegian experts on maritime transport, and we also heard about German merchant vessels.

So we will make sure we are prepared, both for knowledge-building and increased presence. This is why we are planning to commission a new ice-class research vessel. This is mentioned as a specific objective in the report New Building Blocks in the North. The need for such a vessel has by no means diminished as a result of the agreement on the maritime delimitation line in our northern waters. We have a responsibility to increase our level of knowledge about all of these areas. And we must expect increasing demand for knowledge about areas in the Antarctic, where Norway also has responsibilities and interests.

I promise to persist until a vessel lies moored at the buoy here in the sound. But once again, it is a question of pulling in the same direction. This is a good example of the importance of clarifying responsibilities – for example between the Institute of Marine Research and the Norwegian Polar Institute, and between various public bodies – because this is essential in order to pave the way for a large and necessary investment like this one.

*****

A characteristic development we have seen in recent years – as you will have noted here in Tromsø – is the increased interest the international media are showing in the High North. Just watch this.

 

Illustration (film): American TV coverage of the Svalbard Global Seed Vault

Close to 400 foreign journalists visited North Norway in the period 2006–2009. It seems that interest peaked in connection with the opening of the Global Seed Vault in Svalbard.

 

Illustration: University Centre in Svalbard

The news coverage was about a specific event that was important in its own right, but at the same time it showed that we have knowledge and competitive advantages that mean we have a lot to offer.

I often use Svalbard to illustrate that our High North policy is knowledge-based. Svalbard has been developed into one of the world’s most interesting research platforms. In 2004, China opened the Yellow River Research Station in Ny-Ålesund. This summer the Chinese will carry out their fourth Arctic research expedition. The French-German station is active, and India is also well established. The Indian Minister of Science and Technology, whom I met in India a few months ago, will soon visit Svalbard, and this will not be the first time an Indian minister with responsibility for research visits the archipelago.

Svalbard, with its proud history, is now emerging as the most advanced Arctic research platform in the world. As activity in the adjacent sea areas increases, we will have to consider the need for greater presence in order to exercise authority and provide search and rescue capacity.

           

Illustration (film): Russia (Google Earth)

Dear friends,

Let us now move to the mainland. Let us focus on what has been the centre of attention this week, namely relations between Norway and Russia. After all, it is the international perspective that is the theme of this lecture.

 

Illustration: the Norwegian-Russian border

Twenty years ago, the border at Storskog was all but closed, with only a few thousand crossings a year. Today there is a steady flow of goods and people, and more than 100 000 crossings a year.

Our goal has been to make it as simple as possible to cross this border – to visit people on the other side or in connection with studies, trade or cultural exchange.

We have a vision of establishing a Pomor zone, an economic and industrial cooperation zone in the Norwegian-Russian border area. We are now making this vision come true, step by step. Here are some examples to illustrate this:

·         Russian citizens of Arkhangelsk and Murmansk can now apply for a Pomor visa without an invitation.

·         Temporary work permits can be issued to unskilled Russian workers from the Barents region for up to two years for work in any sector in the three northernmost counties.

·         It is possible to apply for a visa on the Internet, and the processing time has been reduced.

·         We have opened a joint one-stop office for information and labour market services in Kirkenes to simplify and speed up the processing of applications for work permits. The feedback from the business community has been positive, as I heard confirmed earlier today.

·         We have twinned the towns of Kirkenes and Nikel with a view to promoting cooperation.

 

Illustration: Norwegian-Russian border zone, map of the local border traffic zone

·         And then there is a landmark event: this morning, in Kirkenes, I could announce that Norway and Russia have reached agreement on the principles for the establishment of a Norwegian-Russian border zone, a local border traffic zone, and the introduction of a border resident ID card, as outlined in the joint Norwegian-Russian statement made public during President Medvedev’s visit.

Those who live within 30 kilometres of the border will be able to cross the border without a visa and stay on the other side for up to 15 days each time. The fee will be EUR 20. Kirkenes, Nikel and Zapolyarny will all be covered by this arrangement. Similar arrangements are being considered for a number of other places along the eastern border of the Schengen area. But this is the first arrangement of this kind, and it is being established at the Norwegian-Russian border.

Consider the scope of this development: the entire northern coast of the European mainland is in the process of becoming borderless, engaging in closer cooperation, and turning towards an ocean that will see new activities – both traditional and novel ones.

Finnmark county is experiencing a shortage of manpower in many areas, and we have therefore taken steps to improve the flow of labour in the Barents region (Report No. 18 (2007–2008) to the Storting). These have been followed up by the labour market authorities in Finnmark and Murmansk, for example by providing training for jobs in the offshore sector and by exchanging experience on the promotion of an inclusive labour market. We have also encouraged further development of the cooperation between the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) and its Russian counterpart with a view to ensuring better protection of workers’ interests. The feedback has been positive.

The long-term goal for Russia, Norway and other European countries should be a visa-free Europe. Our vision for Norwegian-Russian cooperation should be to develop neighbourly relations that are on a par with those we enjoy with the other Nordic countries. Some say this is naive. I say: Can our vision be any other? This is not going to happen overnight, but it should be our goal.

Let me recall an obvious fact, something we all know from experience: progress in any cooperation depends on both parties. Part of the job we need to do, is to make our Russian friends aware of things that from a Norwegian perspective could run more smoothly as regards conditions for establishing companies and doing business, and for entering and staying in Russia. The Russians are excessively bureaucratic, and at times “suspicious”. Sometimes we are reminded of the writer Peter Normann Waage’s well-known words about Russia being somewhere else – wherever that may be.

 

Illustration: the icebreaker Admiral Makarov (on a postage stamp)

But one thing is certain: Russia stretches into the Arctic, in fact it is the largest Arctic state. More than a hundred years ago, Stepan Makarov, the Russian admiral who had the world’s first icebreaker built, said that “Russia is a building facing north.” So does part of Norway – our northern facade.

A glance at the map suffices to see that half of the Arctic coastline belongs to Russia. Well over half of Russia’s proven natural resources are located in what they define as the High North or the Arctic.

 

Illustration: the Russian state visit. Medvedev and Stoltenberg

This alone is reason enough to argue that there can be no Arctic cooperation without Russia. Russia’s legitimate interests in the north – related to resources, security, climate change, the environment, science, politics and culture – are all necessary and natural elements of the equation.

But just as before, there is always an element of unpredictability associated with Russia – which means that for Norway things are never dull. We must not forget that the Soviet Union collapsed 20 years ago, and that Russia is still in the process of transformation. But in recent years we have generally experienced Russia as a cooperation-minded actor in the north, a constructive partner, and the Russian state visit confirmed this impression.

Our mindsets have now been updated with new software. And we are sharing it with our NATO allies. We need NATO and the secure foundation it gives us. In the ongoing process of updating NATO’s Strategic Concept, we are able to point out – and we do – that it is in the north, where the Cold War was at its coldest, that the thaw has been quickest.

Yesterday I happened to bump into Admiral Grytting of the Norwegian National Joint Headquarters in Bodø. He was in Kirkenes to meet the deputy commander-in-chief of Russia’s Northern Fleet to discuss the arrangements for a large-scale joint exercise and a programme of cooperation and joint exercises for 2011. It struck me how different this was from what I learned – for example to count Russian submarines – when I trained as an officer at the Naval Academy around 1980.

 

Illustration: the Russian state visit, Foreign Ministers Støre and Lavrov

However, we should closely follow developments in Russia, this vast country that is still in a process of transformation, and where we still see shortcomings in areas such as human rights. We must ensure that we at all times have the best possible capacity to follow, analyse and understand what our neighbour says and does, because the one does not necessarily follow from the other.

We will still have to live with the fact that a lot of Russia’s military power is concentrated close to our border. We must therefore be pragmatic in our assessments. We must for instance distinguish between an intensified exercise pattern and modernisation of aircraft and vessels on the one hand, and an increased threat against Norway on the other. There is not necessarily a connection.

We are not experiencing any increased threat. Our allies know – and Russia knows – that we are well aware of the realities in the north as far as security policy is concerned. And this knowledge increases security.

 

Illustration: Coast Guard vessel

We will exercise jurisdiction, sovereignty and authority in a credible, consistent and predictable way. We will take a firm line in the north. We have acquired state-of-the-art frigates and modernised the Coast Guard to ensure that we are able to take responsibility and exercise authority. It goes without saying that with increasing maritime traffic and interest in the High North, the need for presence increases. Both to maintain order and to take responsibility as regards search and rescue and emergency preparedness.

 

Illustration: nuclear safety cooperation

We will continue our efforts to reduce real threats to people and the environment, including those posed by nuclear waste and other sources of harm to the environment – of which there are far too many.

We have assisted in the dismantling of five decommissioned nuclear submarines, and all in all to the dismantling of 120 decommissioned submarines in northwestern Russia by 2010.

We have carried out an ambitious programme to secure and remove radioactive power generators from 180 lighthouses in northwestern Russia. A total of NOK 1.4 billion has been spent on these large projects since their inception.

Our nuclear safety cooperation with Russia also includes safety improvements at nuclear power plants and rehabilitation work at Andreyev Bay, only 60 kilometres from the Norwegian-Russian border. This will continue to be a priority task. Large quantities of spent nuclear fuel – equivalent to the amount needed to power about 100 nuclear submarines – and other solid and liquid radioactive waste are still stored here. We are cooperating with Russia and other international partners on arrangements to ensure safe storage and transport. The presence of all of this waste in our proximity is worrying. We must therefore keep this matter high on the agenda. It is Russia’s responsibility, but it is in our interest to provide assistance.

We also keep repeating, as we have for the past 20 years, that Russia must reduce the sulphur emissions from the Pechenga-Nikel smelter. It is scandalous that year after year the plant has been allowed to emit vast amounts of sulphur, five times Norway’s total sulphur emissions. We have made this very clear. In the joint statement issued during the Russian state visit, Russia pledges to deal with this matter. We will follow the situation closely.

           

Illustration (graphic): pipelines in Europe

Now to the other important driving force – energy.

Russia is the largest supplier of natural gas to the European market, followed by Norway. Between us, we supply more than 40% of the gas that is consumed in the EU. Energy resources are of great importance in the Russian economy. Russia has defined Norway as a strategic energy partner, and we are on the threshold of an era of opportunities.

 

Illustration (graphic): energy resources in the Arctic

It has been estimated that about 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil resources and 30% of the gas resources could be located in the Arctic. More than 70% of these gas resources could be located in three areas: the East Barents Basin, the West Siberian Basin, where Yamal is located, and Alaska. More than 90% of the proven gas reserves are in Russian areas.

All projects in the Arctic are a technological challenge. They require greater investments than projects in other petroleum provinces. We need to position ourselves for the new era with the right technology and a competent industry that provides the necessary goods and services – both for activity in Norway and for activity in Russia. We need to position ourselves with sound policies and management plans that balance concerns related to oil, gas, fisheries, nature conservation, environmental protection and climate change. Fifty Norwegian companies have participated in INTSOK’s partnership project to qualify for further engagement in Russia. Norwegian suppliers of maritime equipment have a strong position in Russia, as I observed at the trade fair in Murmansk last October and at a seminar in Kirkenes this morning.

 

Illustration: work on HSE standards at DNV

All of this tells us something about the responsibility we have to develop the Barents Sea as a sea of cooperation – or as a “sea of opportunities”, which was the title of my lecture in 2005 – and to ensure high environmental standards. Last week I received the final report on a DNV-led project involving Russian partners, the purpose of which was to develop proposals for health, safety and environmental standards for activity in the Barents Sea. The project has been supported by the knowledge programme Barents 2020, which was launched here in Tromsø in 2005, and has generated an impressive array of proposals.

Cooperation between environmental authorities is also improving. We are dealing with one ocean and one ecosystem although a boundary runs through it. New opportunities are arising, but we must also assume responsibility.

 

Illustration: the Russian state visit, Norwegian-Russian agreements

So to sum up, our cooperation with Russia covers nearly all aspects of society and all sectors. We have invested in this cooperation, quite literally. There are those who call it “aid”, but I do not agree. It is an investment that will generate returns. The funds have been used to develop relations that had been frozen for several decades.

The list of projects is extensive. They range from competence-building for Russian journalists, prison cooperation, climate change measures and training, to improved energy efficiency, human rights, marine research and fisheries cooperation.

In the cultural field, the list is even longer, ranging from the Riddu Riddu indigenous peoples’ cultural festival, which is now opening an office in Moscow, to events such as Barentsspetakkel, Barentskult and other activities that involve music, dance, theatre and sport.

For many years the sceptics said that culture and people-to-people contact was all very well, but where were the business initiatives? What about investments and employment opportunities?

I’m not for a second in doubt that there is a clear connection here. I am convinced that our support for cultural activities – the human dimension – has led to contacts in the business and research communities and between the authorities. It has made distances appear shorter, opened new channels and built confidence. Yes, precisely that: confidence. Culture in the north, as in the south, is about people-to-people diplomacy, employment opportunities, exports, growth potential and our image.

 

Illustration: the three driving forces – Russia, climate, energy

Closer cooperation between Norway and Russia. This is one of the three driving forces. But there is another dimension: Norway and Russia meet in the context of close regional cooperation as well. This attracts attention far beyond our own area, as others observe the emergence of a region of cooperation.

 

Illustration: the Barents Secretariat in Kirkenes

It started with the Barents Cooperation, and the unique engagement it has generated. This cooperation takes place between governments, municipalities, counties, institutions, organisations and people. The cooperation engaged the regional level, which was virtually given a foreign policy role.

The Barents Secretariat, which you see in the photo here, has become an institution that has contacts in all parts of Europe and receives a steady flow of visitors who want to study its achievements. This year its budget for project activities is NOK 36 million. In the course of 15 years, it has been an incubator for at least 3000 projects in every imaginable field. During His Majesty The King’s visit to Slovakia this autumn, there will be a seminar where the Barents Secretariat will share the experience it has gained as an innovative promoter of successful cross-border regional cooperation. Can it be copied?

 

Illustration (film): panning over the Nordic countries (Google Earth)

Increased focus on the High North is also giving a boost to Nordic cooperation. The Nordic countries are partners in the Barents Cooperation, and we are all members of the Arctic Council, making up five of its eight members, and we are all members of the Council of the Baltic Sea States. The Nordic countries are in many ways the glue that holds these regional arrangements together.

An exciting process is taking place. Norway, Sweden and Finland are intensifying their cooperation on land in the far north. The visit by Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, accompanied by a high-profile delegation of university and business representatives, to Tromsø in June 2007 marked a watershed in Sweden’s interest in the High North. There was also a similar Finnish visit.

Our Nordic neighbours are also in the process of updating their High North strategies:

·         Finland’s Arctic strategy will place considerable emphasis on economic development in the northernmost parts of Finland. The mining industry is being developed in northern Finland. New mines are being opened, and this is creating momentum and opportunities on our side of the border as well.

·         In June, Swedish and Finnish partners will hold a seminar in Kirkenes. The theme will be ores and gas, and the possibility of taking a joint approach to the development of these resources.

·         The mines at Kirkenes have reopened, and I understand that the same is about to happen at Repparfjord. Perhaps there will be a new era of mining in North Norway?

·         The viability of building a railway line from Finland to Troms or Finnmark county is being assessed on serious basis. Who would have guessed that four years ago?

 

Illustration: the Northern Dimension

The last addition is the EU-initiated Northern Dimension, which brings together Norway, Russia, Iceland and the EU, represented by the European Commission.

We welcome the EU’s engagement. Our European partners have a lot to contribute as regards research and expertise, industry, trade and financial power. And they have the same legitimate interests in the region as for example China and India, which I have already mentioned.

Illustration: Stoltenberg and Barroso in Svalbard

It is therefore important for us that the EU and its member states have a good grasp of the situation in the north. Denmark, Sweden and Finland have relatively good knowledge of this area, although they take more of an inland perspective, as opposed to our maritime perspective. But for most Europeans, the High North is a remote place beyond the limits of the weather map they see on TV. Or as a German professor commented when I was giving a lecture on the High North in Berlin: “How interesting. I though Schleswig-Holstein was the High North.”

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is conducting a series of High North dialogues with partners from all parts of the world, but Europe is of course most important. We provide input to the European Commission’s policy work, we provide information and assessments to individual member states, and we regularly receive delegations that want to see the High North for themselves.

We are working in a similar way vis-à-vis the US and interested parties in the US, of which there are an increasing number.

           

Illustration (film): back to Tromsø (Google Earth)

Dear friends,

I have taken you through some chapters of the story of the High North, this region characterised by modern forms of cooperation – touching on the Arctic, our relations with Russia and regional cooperation.

Let us round off here in Tromsø, this city of knowledge that has systematically seized the opportunities offered by the High North. A few days ago, Mayor Hausberg sent me a letter with an overview of the city’s achievements. I would like to commend you for your work, because this in an excellent example of how opportunities can be realised through cooperation. This overview can serve as inspiration for others.

I have considered it important to explain why this is our most important strategic foreign policy initiative. In addition, my aim has been to get across my point about seizing new opportunities by pulling together – that in order to make use of the advantages this region offers, we need to think outside the box, in both political and administrative terms, in our quest for ways to release the potential for value creation, employment and welfare.

If we manage to do that, this could become the most modern and thriving region in Norway. This is the inspiration that underlies the measures set out in New Building Blocks in the North. We are well under way. Of the 38 measures contained in the report, funds have already been allocated for 26, which means that two thirds have already been initiated, and they will span two parliamentary terms.

It is now important that we approach this task in such a way that our efforts trigger activity, investments and initiatives. And once again knowledge is essential – it feels appropriate to be saying this at a university – knowledge that paves that way for investments, new value creation and new employment opportunities.

This was the backdrop to Barents 2020, the knowledge programme for value creation and new economic activity in the north, which I launched right here in November 2005.

 

Illustration: Barents 2020. Knowledge

The Barents 2020 programme has been developed year by year. This year we have allocated NOK 55 million for strategic knowledge development.

There are numerous projects. I have already mentioned the development of common standards for health, safety and environment for the Barents Sea. The Norwegian Shipowners’ Association and Bodø University College, together with Russian interests and contacts, are developing the Centre for High North Logistics, with a particular focus on the Kirkenes area. They are preparing for maritime transport across the Arctic Ocean, and their work is already well under way, as I observed at the seminar I participated in this morning in Kirkenes.

We have established a High North grant scheme and launched the project Geopolitics in the North. In addition, we have set up five chairs and guest professorships – for example here at Tromsø University, in connection with the programme for earth observation and remote sensing for monitoring the environment and climate change. We have also concluded a very active International Polar Year.

The support provided by the Research Council of Norway for High North research amounts to about NOK 600 million per year. In 2008 about 22% of the funds were allocated to research institutions here in North Norway. In 2009 this share had increased to 36%.

Since we presented our High North Strategy on 1 December 2006, we have increased government budget allocations for specific High North-related measures by NOK 1.5 billion. Our aim has been to boost value creation in the High North.

           

Illustration: marine bioprospecting (halibut fry)

An example of this is support for the development of marine bioprospecting here in Tromsø, including research on living resources in deep waters and how they can be used. NOK 50 million has been allocated for the prospecting of living marine resources. It is likely that something like 10 000 species have been poorly investigated, and some of these could have properties that could be used to develop new medicines and materials.

A new era may be opening up in this field. Just think of farmed salmon. Who would have thought in 1980 that this would be Norway’s second largest export product by 2000? What might marine bioprospecting have led to by 2030? We simply do not know, and that is what makes it so exciting.

 

Illustration: presence, activity, knowledge

This, dear friends, brings us to the end my story. I will use this new industry as an example of the fundamental challenge I see when for a moment I take a broader perspective than that of the Foreign Minister.

My question to the stakeholders is: what can we do to mobilise the necessary knowledge, capital and resources so that they pull in the same direction and unleash the growth potential of this industry?

As Hans Olav Karde pointed out, neither the Prime Minster nor the Foreign Minister can be expected to set up companies. But we can and will help to put in place the fruitful cooperation that is required.

But we must ask ourselves – as you should ask us – whether we are doing this well enough. What can we do better? How can government bodies best do their part of the job?

We must dare to pose these critical questions, both to each other and to ourselves.

Are we succeeding in providing framework conditions for oil and gas activities in the north that will result in employment, value creation and other spin-off effects in this part of the country?

Are we coordinating our efforts sufficiently in order to become Russia’s strategic partner in the energy field?

Are we succeeding in stimulating the tourism industry to focus systematically on knowledge, marketing, product development and logistics? Are the actors in North Norway pulling in the same direction even though they are competitors?

Are we able to envisage closer cooperation and coordination between educational institutions, so that they avoid spreading themselves too thin, but rather focus their resources in order to be at the forefront in their priority areas – and thereby become attractive partners internationally?

Are we able to take an overall view of the challenges related to transport in the north, and envisage a transport system where the different modes of transport supplement each other better?

Are we doing enough to take our historical responsibility vis-à-vis indigenous people?

And finally, are the politicians and political bodies in North Norway able to take a common approach to the High North – one that goes beyond that of each individual county? Are they able to draw up a common, binding strategy in cooperation with the government and government authorities?

 

Illustration: back to Rolf Jacobsen’s poem

Dear friends,

What I have found truly inspiring in my work on the High North Strategy has been the optimism I have encountered in the north, the healthy impatience, the many expectations and the abundance of plans and ideas.

I am not closing my eyes to the challenges and problems. I know they exist. The challenge is now to get all the positive energy in the north to pull more in the same direction, to explore the opportunities that lie in cooperation and partnerships more purposefully, and to commit more wholeheartedly to a common strategy that mobilises the whole of North Norway – in fact the whole of the country. Nothing less.

Norway must recognise that it is now time to act.

Norway must take a leading role and pursue an integrated, up-to-date and forward-looking policy for the High North.

We must take the lead when it comes to knowledge, management, and economic, social and cultural development in the north. This is how we will provide framework conditions that produce results.

We intend to play a proactive role in developing international cooperation in the north – in practical, strategic and analytical terms. To build strong and stable relations with our neighbours. To promote binding common solutions where needed. To support those forces in the north that want to make use of the opportunities that are arising.

The basic idea is that there must be active commitment to the High North Strategy in the north, but the whole of Norwegian society should have a sense of ownership of it.

The north must take a leading and guiding role. Norwegian society must know this story, understand its national importance and engage as a reliable partner.

This land is long. Most is north.

The northernmost part of Norway is not the addressee of the High North Strategy. This is where we find the sender and the leading partner.

Thank you.

Illustration: title slide/background