Foreign Minister Knut Vollebæk

Statement to the Storting on Norway's chairmanship of the OSCE

19 November 1998

Translation from the Norwegian

Check against delivery

Mr. President,

Forty-nine Norwegians are now in place in Kosovo. They are part of the international corps of verifiers that is to monitor the agreement concluded following the negotiations between US Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke and President Slobodan Milosevic last month. The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) is responsible for the operation, which is the largest in its history. In the course of January, up to 2000 verifiers will be stationed in Kosovo. Seventy of them will be Norwegians, including the chief-of-staff.

Norway is responsible for establishing the headquarters of the international verification mission (KVM). The project is well under way. Communications equipment, most of it produced in Norway, is now being installed in cooperation with the armed forces and Telenor. Four plane-loads of telecommunications and computer equipment have been flown in this week by military Hercules aircraft, and two more plane-loads will be delivered during the next few days. The equipment is to be installed by 30 November, which means that the KVM will be able to begin work in earnest.

There is little doubt that the Kosovo mission will be one of the main tasks of the forthcoming Norwegian chairmanship of the OSCE. The verification mission will be considerably larger than all the other OSCE missions put together. Great political, financial and practical demands will be made, not only on the OSCE, but also on the ability of the chairmanship to head and coordinate the mission's activities.

Norway attaches great importance to the safety of those taking part in the mission. This will be given priority within the OSCE itself, but the agreement made with NATO concerning support in the event of an evacuation will also be important. NATO has been given the responsibility for air surveillance to ensure that the parties comply with the agreement. If the Alliance keeps a visible profile, this will reduce the risk run by OSCE personnel, as will efforts to foster good relations between the OSCE and the people on both sides of the conflict.

The KVM will also be responsible for coordinating the efforts of a number of other international organizations. The EU will be heavily involved, and will provide both observers on the ground and humanitarian assistance. A number of intergovernmental and private humanitarian organizations, such as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and several Norwegian aid organizations, will try to meet the most urgent needs of the civilian population.

There will be many concrete tasks to address. Humanitarian efforts on behalf of the civilian population will be vital. Those who have been driven from their homes must be allowed to return. Fundamental human rights must be safeguarded. Democratic elections are to be held in the course of next year, which will lay the foundations for a high degree of autonomy for Kosovo. Representative institutions and a police force that reflects the ethnic diversity of the population will be established, and the OSCE will also be involved in these efforts.

The OSCE's wide-ranging efforts could provide the basis for new negotiations between the Serbs and the Kosovar Albanians to find a political solution to the conflict. It could also pave the way for the FRY to participate in the OSCE. The Government is concerned that the OSCE should contribute to stability not only in Kosovo, but in all of Yugoslavia and the region as a whole. Thus the participation of the FRY is one of our objectives.

There is also a need for further stabilization measures in the areas surrounding Kosovo. The OSCE is working on several initiatives in this respect. The establishment of the group "Friends of Albania" has made it possible to intensify efforts in this country. The group is an informal forum under the joint leadership of the EU and the OSCE and is intended to bring together countries and organizations that are providing assistance to Albania. Its purpose is to coordinate aid to the country and to signal broad international support for the reforms. The OSCE presence in Albania is intended to coordinate international efforts within the country.

The decision to increase the Norwegian contingent in UNPREDEP in Macedonia from 45 to 160 personnel must be viewed in the same perspective. Strengthening the UN military presence in Macedonia will be a significant step in the efforts to prevent the Kosovo conflict from spreading. It will reinforce the positive trend in Macedonia, which has so far escaped the worst consequences of the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia.

Mr. President,

It is important to place the OSCE mission in Kosovo in a larger context. It is almost exactly nine years since the fall of the Berlin Wall. On the night of 9 November 1989, the boundary between the two halves of post-war Europe literally crumbled and turned to dust at the feet of the people of Berlin.

What the television cameras naturally failed to capture on that historic November night was the fact that the dissolution of a repressive regime leaves a political vacuum that needs to be filled. Whereas West Germany had an established democracy to offer East Germany, this was not the case in the Balkans and the former Soviet republics. Eighty years after the end of World War I, the peace and security of Europe are again threatened by longstanding ethnic, religious, cultural and social strife. As we approach the end of the 20th century, the historical repercussions of the confrontation between the great powers which took place at its very beginning still occupy a prominent place in European security policy.

Have we learned anything from history? I hope so. The effort invested in conflict prevention and crisis management is changing the European security policy landscape. Preventive diplomacy is no longer the preserve of great powers, although they still have central roles to play. A web of international organizations is now driving this work forward, using the bitter experience of the past, ensuring that all member countries have a voice. We have also learned that violations of the freedoms and rights of individuals, absence of the rule of law, discrimination of ethnic, religious and social groups or economic injustice can have major consequences on an international scale, and can affect us here in Norway too.

Preventive diplomacy today is therefore directed towards individuals to a far greater extent than before. International organizations establish contact locally with both victims and perpetrators. Efforts are being made to facilitate people-to-people cooperation. Great pains are being taken to instil democratic ideals and attitudes in the civilians involved in a conflict.

Summit meetings between military and political leaders are no longer sufficient. We have come a long way from the agreements reached at Versailles in 1918 or Yalta in 1945 to the variety of methods for conflict resolution that are applied under the auspices of the OSCE. The organization's most important form of preventive diplomacy takes place in the field, among the people we wish to help.

The OSCE is therefore a particularly suitable instrument for promoting peace and security in today's Europe. The organization has a broad membership base, it acts as a bridge to other institutions such as the UN, NATO and the EU, and it has at its disposal a wide range of tools for mediating and building confidence between individuals and social groups.

Mr. President,

When we take over the OSCE chairmanship formally in January, the Kosovo operation will, by virtue of its very size, be a major foreign policy challenge. Political, economic and humanitarian measures to reconstruct civil society must be closely coordinated. This is a complicated task, and we must be realistic in our expectations of what can be achieved in the short term. We must also be prepared for the possibility that other conflicts may break out in the OSCE area.

I am therefore pleased that there is broad political support for the decision for Norway to shoulder this responsibility. The chairmanship will undoubtedly require substantial resources. We will be heading efforts to develop practical measures that can be used in response to emergencies such as that in Kosovo, we will be actively involved on the ground in other actual or potential conflict areas, and we will continue the efforts to consolidate the reforms in Central and Eastern Europe.

Through the chairmanship, we will be an important contributor to European security and will be able to prove ourselves to be a reliable partner. In my view, our willingness to take responsibility will also result in enhanced cooperation with our friends and allies.

The chairmanship gives us the opportunity to play a key role in the shaping of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture. In the Government's view, it is very important that Norway is in a central position when these issues are being discussed, so that its needs and interests can also be safeguarded. This process is now entering a decisive phase as responsibilities and tasks are distributed among the various institutions and cooperation arrangements. The transformation of NATO, the enlargement of the Alliance and of the EU, and the development of a flexible concept for integrated peace operations, as in Bosnia and to a certain extent in Kosovo, will alter the security policy landscape in which we have to orient ourselves.

It is therefore in our national interest to take on the chairmanship and be involved in shaping solutions to the major challenges facing Europe today.

The new security architecture must meet the challenges of today, not those of yesterday. The OSCE has to a growing extent proved itself capable of satisfying needs no other organization has been able to meet. It is particularly the long-term efforts to establish viable democracies that have given the OSCE its unique image and role. The human dimension of European security, the way in which political, economic, religious and cultural trends affect the lives of individuals, is the OSCE's hallmark. I will return to this subject later in my statement.

Cooperation in the OSCE does of course have its weaknesses. The fact that all decisions must be made by consensus between 54 countries is regarded by many as perhaps the greatest impediment. It can mean that those who want the least have the greatest impact. Making decisions can take time, even though consensus in the OSCE is understood as an absence of objections, rather than explicit agreement. On the other hand, the very fact that all the member countries have had an opportunity to influence the result means that decisions made in the OSCE carry considerable political weight and legitimacy.

Mr. President,

Norway has participated actively in creating an effective OSCE. It is one of the foremost contributors to the organization's activities, in terms of both personnel and financial resources. It is in Norway's own interest to promote the most efficient use of these resources. It is also in our interest to take good care of the Norwegian men and women working in the OSCE, sometimes under very difficult conditions. We must therefore make sure that the resources available match our level of ambition.

I would stress the need for the OSCE to assign strict priorities when selecting which tasks to take on. We must have a realistic starting point. Most conflicts have a long history. Their resolution is often complicated and time-consuming and what we can accomplish in the course of only one year is naturally limited. The strategy must be to continue the work of the previous chairmanship - putting one stone on top of another until the edifice is complete.

It is important to be prepared for the unexpected. Most previous chairmanships have been confronted by the need for action in conflicts that have been difficult to predict. Many of the issues that the Norwegian chairmanship will be dealing with are unknown to us today. The dramatic developments in the Kosovo conflict are only the most recent example of this.

Given the situation I have described, the Norwegian OSCE chairmanship will have four main priorities. As I see it, our first main priority will be to exercise political leadership, bringing together the members of the OSCE to take political and practical action in specific situations. Our function will be to take political initiatives and build consensus. One of the criteria in deciding how successful our chairmanship is will be our ability to balance the need for consensus against the need for rapid response in emergencies.

We will have to do our job while under pressure from opposing interests. At the outset, the divergent national interests of the parties involved will often mean that they have very different standpoints. Thus, it is a difficult, time-consuming task to reconcile the various views and this may often put a considerable political strain on the chairman-in-office. In some cases it may mean that we have fewer opportunities to promote exclusively Norwegian views. But we will have a central role in leading the work of conflict prevention and conflict resolution in Europe. This in itself will provide an opportunity to safeguard Norwegian interests.

Close contact with all parties will be necessary if we are to succeed. This applies of course to those who are directly affected by a conflict, but also to others. Relations with the USA, Russia, the UN, NATO, the EU and the Contact Group for the Former Yugoslavia will be particularly important. I would also emphasize the contact with Germany and Finland, which will be holding the presidency of the EU during Norway’s chairmanship. Close cooperation with the other members of the OSCE troika, Poland and probably Austria, will also be important.

Mr. President,

Our second priority as chairman-in-office will be to strengthen what is known as the organization's human dimension, i.e. the efforts to promote human rights, democracy and the principles of the rule of law. Since 1948, when Norway participated in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, our country has been among those that have emphasized most strongly that this is not a matter of internal affairs.

Many of our efforts in these areas next year will take place in the OSCE and the UN Commission on Human Rights, where we will also be a member from the turn of the year. Both of these positions will be useful tools and will give us new opportunities to achieve concrete results, not least as regards the various countries' observance of the commitments they have undertaken.

The OSCE must be consolidated as a community based on common values for the whole of Europe. The organization's moral authority in connection with the shaping of the Euro-Atlantic security architecture must be emphasized. In my view the strengthening of this aspect is in keeping with what the OSCE has always stood for, from its first beginnings as the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe over 20 years ago.

Democracy-building, fundamental human rights and safeguarding the rule of law are at the very core of the OSCE's work. These priorities are in keeping with Norwegian traditions and values and are central to the Government's own policy. I would also like to emphasize that these "softer" aspects of security have done much to help stabilize the new democracies in Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans.

Let me expand on this, Mr. President. The recent elections in Bosnia have shown that the trend towards democracy is continuing. But the international community must continue to be prepared for setbacks. It is therefore important to maintain our involvement in Bosnia at full strength. The achievements of the last three years must not be wasted.

While the emphasis so far has been on elections, I feel that the efforts next year should include the establishment of stable political structures, including political parties and NGOs, and a public administration in line with the requirements of a genuine democracy. Monitoring human rights will also be very important. Unless refugees and internally displaced persons are helped to return, I doubt that Bosnia will be able to achieve the goals that have been set out in the Dayton Agreement.

In Albania the OSCE has since 1996 been involved in persistent efforts to stabilize the political situation and to help the reform process off to a good start. Events this autumn have shown that the country has a long way to go before the political and economic reforms are consolidated. However, the OSCE played a stabilizing role during the unrest in September. I would go so far as to say that unless we maintain an active OSCE presence there will be unrest in Albania for a long time to come.

In Croatia the OSCE is now the most important foreign player since the UN terminated its involvement in Eastern Slavonia a month ago. There is still much to do, especially with respect to the return of refugees and internally displaced persons. The OSCE mission will play an important role in this work and I consider that the OSCE police force in Eastern Slavonia, which was established when the UN withdrew, could have an important stabilizing function. It should help to convince the population that the OSCE intends to stay in the country until the remaining problems are solved.

In the Caucasus and Central Asia, too, the organization has had an extensive presence and involvement. In the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno Karabakh the OSCE has assumed the role of mediator on behalf of the international community. The instrument for this endeavour is the Minsk Group, which Norway has recently joined. The peace process has been stagnating for a long time, but there are now signs that a more positive trend may have begun. The Minsk Group has presented the parties with proposals that we hope will create new momentum.

The situation in Chechnya poses a particular challenge. Currently the OSCE's presence provides a point of contact between the Chechnyan authorities and the international community, and the organization serves as a channel for humanitarian assistance. At the same time the security situation is unsatisfactory. The usefulness of having a presence must be continually weighed against the risks run by the personnel. The Support Group for Chechnya was temporarily withdrawn three weeks ago, but it is now on its way back again after a thorough assessment of the situation.

I would like to use these concrete examples to emphasize the importance of the OSCE missions and subordinate institutions in practical terms. Without their considerable efforts in the field it would not have been possible to achieve as much as we have. The Norwegian chairmanship will give priority to ensuring that these missions and OSCE institutions can continue to function efficiently.

We must continue to focus on countries and regions where OSCE principles are not yet fully recognized, where democratic structures are weak and there is insufficient understanding of what democracy entails. I must emphasize that there is no question of introducing new commitments. The problem is more the lack of implementation of the commitments the OSCE countries have already undertaken.

In our work on the human dimension, we must follow a dual strategy. Firstly, the OSCE must continue to provide expert assistance through its missions and institutions so as to build up viable democracies in the true sense of the word. Secondly, non-compliance with commitments must be brought to light. The most important forum for this is the annual implementation meeting on the human dimension in Warsaw, at which the status of the participating states' implementation of their commitments with respect to human rights and the rule of law is discussed. Compliance with commitments is also a central topic within the framework of the OSCE's Permanent Council in Vienna, and should be given increasing emphasis. This is something we have advocated on a number of occasions.

At the same time, we know that democracy does not flourish if the fundamental causes of dissatisfaction in the population are not dealt with. With regard to economic and social issues, the OSCE can supplement and reinforce activities in other fora such as the IMF, the World Bank, the UN's Economic Commission for Europe, and the EU. Geographically speaking the need for action is most pressing in the Caucasus and Central Asia. The countries in this region have many problems in common. These are societies with weak democratic structures, weak economic growth, lack of reforms, poverty, unemployment, serious environmental problems, lack of clean water and a considerable potential for social, ethnic and especially religious tension. These problems are compounded by longstanding, unresolved conflicts and the resulting streams of refugees and internally displaced persons.

The Norwegian chairmanship will attach great importance to cooperation with organizations such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the High Commissioner for Refugees and the Council of Europe. We see the need for discussion with these organizations on how cooperation can be strengthened, and will take the initiative for a meeting on this topic during our chairmanship.

The OSCE will soon have permanent representatives in all the Central Asian republics and in the long term also in Armenia and Azerbaijan. These are the right priorities given the potential conflicts facing the international community in this region.

Norway has taken the initiative for the development of a coherent strategy for dealing with the challenges facing the OSCE in Central Asia. The goal of such a strategy is to ensure the best possible cooperation between all the players, and the fullest possible exploitation of the limited resources at our disposal. In addition we will make a thorough assessment of the possibility of increasing Norwegian involvement in Central Asia and the Caucasus.

All the OSCE member countries in this region are classified as developing countries according to OECD and DAC guidelines. In the recommendations on the Foreign Ministry's 1998 budget the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs referred to the major social, economic and humanitarian problems in the ODA-approved countries of Central and Eastern Europe. The committee agreed that funds for measures to strengthen and consolidate democracy and humanitarian assistance to these countries could be allocated under the chapter "Peace, reconciliation and democracy". This shows that there is broad political support for a stronger involvement in Central Asia, which has been followed up in next year's budget proposal. We will consider providing even more support for these efforts. Assistance in environmental and natural resource management will be of particular interest, since we have considerable expertise in this field. The Ministry of the Environment will naturally be involved in these efforts.

Experience in both the former Yugoslavia and the Caucasus has shown that economic reform and humanitarian assistance are often not enough. Lack of recognition of the linguistic, cultural and religious rights of minorities is a basic cause of regional tension. At the same time there is no doubt that European culture and values are of vital importance in the efforts to eliminate dividing lines in our part of the world. The free movement of ideas, respect for others' rights and unimpeded contact between individuals should therefore lie at the heart of the OSCE's preventive diplomacy.

An improved dialogue and cooperation on cultural and religious issues will in my view foster understanding and contact and do much to diminish tension. This will be a central element of our work on the OSCE's human dimension.

Contact with the Council of Europe is especially important in this context. The spheres of responsibility of the OSCE and the Council of Europe partly overlap in the areas of democracy and human rights, but at the same time there are also definite differences between the two organizations. The OSCE focuses mainly on conflict prevention and reconstruction after conflicts, especially through work in the field, whereas the Council of Europe is engaged in long-term efforts to safeguard human rights and strengthen democratic government in its member countries.

The criterion for contact must be whether it satisfies operational needs. Norway has put forward a number of concrete proposals on how practical cooperation between the two organizations can be strengthened. We must avoid competition and duplication of effort. In addition to safeguarding human rights and democracy-building, I regard strengthening the cultural and religious rights of minorities as a possible area of cooperation. I have arranged to discuss this in more detail with my Icelandic colleague, who will be the next president of the Council of Europe.

Mr. President,

This leads me to the third main priority of the Norwegian OSCE chairmanship, which will be to intensify international cooperation on our common goals. We wish to strengthen the web of international organizations engaged in conflict prevention efforts in Europe today, first and foremost the UN, NATO, the EU and the Council of Europe.

I will attach particular importance to devising guidelines for practical cooperation based on the comparative advantages of the various organizations. In my view, the cooperation in the former Yugoslavia demonstrates the potential that exists here. As chairman-in-office, our goal will be to facilitate this process on behalf of the OSCE.

Negotiations are currently under way on a Document-Charter on European Security, which is to define the role and tasks of the OSCE within this framework. The aim is to make the best possible use of the combined resources of the international community. If everything goes according to plan, the document will be finalized before next year's OSCE summit. I would, however, underline that we must take the time we need to arrive at a satisfactory result.

Our role will be to give impetus to the negotiations on the security document-charter and achieve consensus on its substance. However, Norwegian interests and priorities will also be underlined. The most important task for us will be to get the participating states to agree that the OSCE is to continue as it is today, that cooperation and contact between the institutions comprising the Euro-Atlantic security architecture will be developed further, and that the influence enjoyed by the small countries in the OSCE must not be curtailed.

In my view, the negotiations should conclude that one of the OSCE's most important contributions lies in eliminating non-military sources of conflict. One of the controversial issues in the consultations on the security document-charter has been whether the OSCE should also undertake military peacekeeping operations. As early as 1994, it was decided in principle that the organization could if necessary carry out a peacekeeping mission in connection with a peace agreement in Nagorno Karabakh. Although this may still be a possibility, the most widespread view is probably that the OSCE's role in military peacekeeping operations should generally be to provide a mandate and contribute to integrated operations in which others, such as the UN or NATO, are responsible for the military component. However, the possibility of the OSCE carrying out peacekeeping operations with a military component in exceptional cases should not be excluded if there are no other alternatives. Nagorno Karabakh could be an example of such an operation.

On the other hand, I regard civil police operations as an important means of preventing conflict and rebuilding societies that have been ravaged by conflict. In my view, the assumption of police functions in Eastern Slavonia signals a new and forward-looking aspect of the OSCE's activities. A police presence is important not only for defusing conflicts, monitoring human rights and preventing abuses, but also for demonstrating the role of the police in a democratic society. Without an effective democratic police force, the rule of law cannot gain a foothold. I believe we will see more examples of international cooperation on police operations in future. This provides opportunities for greater flexibility in managing conflicts on the ground.

New tasks such as these show that the OSCE is adapting to new requirements. They also indicate an increasingly clear division of responsibility between the UN and the OSCE as regards conflict prevention and crisis management in Europe, such as for example in Croatia.

Mr. President,

The OSCE already has a very comprehensive agenda. In recent years, the organization has been given an increasing number of assignments in the field. Our fourth main priority as chairman-in-office will be to continue the efforts to strengthen the organization's ability to address these tasks. Priority must be given to operational needs. Measures have already been taken to improve the efficiency of the secretariat in Vienna so that it is better able to assist the chairman-in-office and the missions. We intend to continue this process.

Today the secretariat has very limited resources compared with those of other international organizations. The organization may need more personnel for the additional responsibilities it has taken on. This has been underscored by the amount of work involved in establishing the verification mission in Kosovo. The subordinate institutions also need to be strengthened. If this is not done, it may undermine the OSCE’s ability to prevent conflict and build viable democratic societies.

I wish, however, to emphasize that the secretariat and subordinate institutions must not be strengthened at the expense of the leading role played by the chairman-in-office. This role is what has made the organization what it is today. The chairman-in-office must continue to represent and uphold the OSCE’s authority, take political initiatives and ensure political consensus on the guidelines for practical tasks. The chairman-in-office must have the overall responsibility for ensuring that the organization functions smoothly and must take responsibility for coordination with other bodies and organizations.

One extremely important task is to secure the OSCE’s financial base. The organization is rightly proud of its reputation for economy and rapid response. I too am interested in preserving this reputation. But there is no doubt that the increase in responsibilities puts a great financial strain on the OSCE. The overriding goal must be to bring the organization’s economic capability into line with the tasks it is given.

There is already less dependence on ad-hoc funding. A special scale for contributions to large-scale operations has been adopted, as has a separate fund for crisis management, which was proposed by Norway. The measures have demonstrated their value in connection with the mission in Kosovo. Efforts to provide the OSCE with a sound financial base must be continued. This means that all the member states must follow up political decisions with the necessary resources.

A strengthening of the OSCE also involves better recruitment practices and training. I would like to see the OSCE develop a concept for training its own personnel. All the member countries must see to it that the quality of the personnel made available is satisfactory. They are also responsible for ensuring that training and preparations are commensurate with the challenges confronting the personnel. Here I believe there is considerable potential for cooperating with other organizations that deal with the same issues, for example the Council of Europe.

Mr. President,

To sum up, the Norwegian chairman-in-office has one overriding goal, to strengthen the role of the OSCE in regional conflict resolution. The Government intends to use the chairmanship to develop the OSCE further as an instrument for preventive diplomacy and crisis management.

We will build on the organization’s unique qualities. The OSCE's membership comprises all the countries in the region concerned. Its moral authority as regards respect for human rights and democracy-building is widely acknowledged. It is flexible and capable of responding quickly. It is cost-effective, and it has a presence in the relevant conflict areas.

Next month’s meeting of the Council of Ministers in Oslo signals that the responsibility for heading the organization is being gradually transferred from Poland to Norway. The meeting will have a wide-ranging agenda on which the various regional crisis areas will, of course, figure centrally.

We will use the occasion to make a thorough review of the negotiations on the Document-Charter on European Security. The Polish chairman-in-office will present a status report, which should provide us with a basis for drawing up policy guidelines to take the process one step further.

Next year’s chairmanship will unquestionably involve a great deal of work. But I would like to stress that it is in our interest to do the job properly. The chairmanship gives us an opportunity to take responsibility. We will be in a central position and our voice will be heard in discussions on vital questions concerning both European security and our own. We will have an opportunity to show that we are capable of heading an organization that deals with difficult tasks and of striking a balance between opposing considerations when devising coherent political and practical responses to specific challenges.

If we succeed, we will have shown that Norway is a reliable partner and ally. This is in our national interest. We will also have shown what Norway stands for and what ideals we hold highest. But not least, we will have made a contribution to increased stability and security in Europe.