State Secretary Mr. Leiv Lunde

“Humanitarian Assistance, Conflict Resolution and Development”

CARE International Board of Directors CARE Norge. Meetings in Oslo 15-16 May 1999

Ladies and gentlemen,

Introduction

CARE Norge is a familiar partner for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and for NORAD. The Ministry has supported CARE projects in several countries, among them Iraq, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Somalia and Nicaragua. This is an indication of the wide geographical scope of your organization. It also shows that you are no stranger to conflict situations and the challenges of reconciliation and rehabilitation.

I would like to take this opportunity to present my Government’s approach to humanitarian assistance, conflict resolution and development. We have recently presented a comprehensive strategy for humanitarian assistance to the Storting, the Norwegian parliament, and I will introduce this later.

But first a few words on how we perceive the role of organizations like yours in this work.

The role of NGOs

As you may know, there is a close relationship between the Government and the Norwegian NGOs involved in development and humanitarian assistance.

The Norwegian authorities cooperate extensively with NGOs both as regards the amount of assistance channelled through the organizations and in terms of the scope of their activities. There are five major NGOs that play a central role in humanitarian assistance. The "Norwegian model" has been used to describe the close, but informal and flexible form of cooperation that has developed between the authorities and NGOs. The concept refers not only to cooperation on humanitarian assistance, but equally to peace and reconciliation processes, where the local knowledge and contacts of the organizations can be successfully utilized and combined with mediation efforts.

Norwegian NGOs, including CARE Norge, have done outstanding work to help those in need for many years. The Government will continue to regard them as key partners in international relief efforts. We welcome the fact that the NGOs themselves have drawn up codes of conduct, or standards, for ensuring the quality of their relief efforts.

One of their criteria is neutrality. Some of the organizations, however, give priority to genuine solidarity, which involves choosing sides politically. This is up to the NGOs themselves. The decisive factor, however, is the ability of the NGOs to complement each other's efforts and to work in accordance with the international humanitarian framework under the auspices of the UN.

The background for our active engagement

There is no need for me to describe to you the needs of the greater part of the world’s population and the challenges that face us all. My Government is focussing more and more on the links between lack of development, lack of respect for human rights, violent conflict, and the need for humanitarian assistance, conflict resolution and reconciliation. We see a clear need for an integrated approach to these complex issues. Much of what I want to say today will focus on humanitarian assistance and solving conflicts, but for us this is an important part of a long-term development process.

Caring about the sufferings of others should be a moral imperative for all of us. Every human being has the same worth and the same inherent human rights.

Our belief in the realization of all human rights for all people, no matter where they live, is the background for our cooperation with Canada and other countries on human security.

The term human security can be defined as safety from both violent and non-violent threats. It is a condition or state of being where people are freefrom living under constant threats to their rights, their safety or even their lives. From a foreign policy point of view, human security is perhaps best understood as a shift in perspective or orientation. It is an alternative way of seeing the world, taking people as its point of reference, rather than focusing exclusively on the security of territory or governments.

Human security does not supplant national security. A human security perspective asserts that the security of the state is not an end in itself. Rather, it is a means of ensuring security for its people. In this context, state security and human security are mutually supportive.

Building an effective, democratic state that values its own people and protects minorities is a central strategy for promoting human security. At the same time, improving the human security of its people strengthens the legitimacy, stability and security of a state. When states are externally aggressive, internally repressive, or too weak to govern effectively, they threaten human security. When human security becomes a fact rather than an aspiration, this condition can be attributed in large measure to effective governance by the state.

From a human security perspective, we have a moral duty not only to do our part to resolve conflicts and ensure that those in power are held accountable for their actions. We must also help the victims, those whose lives are affected. This is a matter of human dignity, solidarity and the struggle against injustice and poverty. This is the humanitarian imperative.

Many developing countries take on a heavy burden by accepting a steady stream of refugees from their neighbouring countries, a response that should be held in far more respect by the international community. This means that Norway, as one of the wealthiest countries in the world, has an even greater responsibility to use its resources to help those in need.

If we fail to examine the reasons why conflicts arise and disasters occur, we will not be able to alter the course of events. The humanitarian imperative must therefore, be expressed not only through humanitarian assistance, by saving lives, but also through a much more broad-based approach.

Assistance must answer the real needs of the people and safeguard their rights. It must help to strengthen local capacity, not weaken it. It must ensure that those who are affected do not become dependent on external support, but are empowered to take control of their own situation and their own development as quickly as possible. It must be organized so that it does not provide a basis for a renewed outbreak of hostilities or the development of new conflicts. It must not leave communities more vulnerable to future natural disasters. It must not become a form of permanent life support or a substitute for political action.

An integrated approach to humanitarian assistance, conflict resolution, development and human rights

Many people say that poverty is a cause of conflict. But you can also turn this around and say that conflict is a cause of poverty. Conflict is a cause of human suffering, of the breakdown of society, of wasted resources. For the international community it is often easier to provide victims with food and blankets than to tackle the root causes of the conflict itself.

To me, it is obvious that we have to do both. We have to engage in a process that will break the vicious circle of human rights violations, suffering, retaliation, and poverty. The key is the lasting peaceful resolution of conflicts, the reconciliation of former enemies, the building of new relationships based on trust and common interests. The human rights of all people must be respected. Development aid can be an important part of this process. Development gives all parties hope for a better future and a stake in this future.

You may think that this is easier said than done. But we have done it, and we are doing it. I would like to describe two examples of how we have implemented an integrated approach to conflict resolution and development, in Guatemala and Sudan

Norway has been involved in Guatemala since the 1976 earthquake, first simply providing emergency relief, later supporting long-term development. The Norwegian Government and the NGO Norwegian Church Aid developed good contacts with both the guerilla movement and the Government of Guatemala.

Norway facilitated talks and negotiations between the two parties. This led eventually to the signing of the agreement on a definitive cease-fire in Oslo in 1996. Throughout the negotiations, Norway supported the process financially. Economic support was needed to finance the demobilization and reintegration of former soldiers on both sides. We made a long-term commitment to Guatemala. The signing of the cease-fire agreement was a step on the road to lasting peace.

Our responsibility did not end there. The television cameras have left Guatemala now, but we have not. We are involved in human rights projects, in strengthening democracy and in economic development. I believe this long-term strategy will secure the foundationsfor peaceful development and prevent future conflict. This is obviously in the interests of the people of Guatemala, but ultimately also in the interests of neighbouring countries and the international community.

Sudan has been afflicted by war since its independence in 1956. The only reprieve has been the eleven-year peace from 1972 to 1983. This conflict is Africa’s longest running civil war. Although there will always be disagreement about the root cause of the hostility between the parties and the war itself, most observers agree that a key factor is the relationship between North and South, not only in terms of ethnic and cultural composition, but also of differences in development levels and distribution of natural resources.

After 30 years of war and agony, the people of Sudan deserve better. I firmly believe that humanitarian assistance alone is not enough to prevent the recurrence of mass suffering, and should not be allowed to replace political action.

I believe that assistance during conflicts must include initiatives that can promote reconciliation, democratic development and respect for human rights. These must encompass political and security policy issues and support political initiatives for peace in a way that recognizes and enhances local ownership of political processes.

When we take on the responsibility for facilitating the resolution of violent conflicts, four factors seem to be paramount. These are in-depth knowledge and analysis of the political dynamics of the country, good networks, a long-term perspective and coordination. Norway has been assisting Sudan for nearly 30 years. In the last few years most of this assistance has taken the form of humanitarian aid channelled through Norwegian organizations, but it has also included long-term development initiatives and long-standing cooperation in various academic fields.

For more than four years several of the countries in the regional organization IGAD have tried to create a basis for a peaceful solution in Sudan. Many donors have supported these peace efforts through a separate Sudan committee in the IGAD Partners’ Forum, whose chairperson is currently Ms Hilde F. Johnson, the Norwegian Minister of International Development and Human Rights.

When the IGAD Partners’ Forum met in Oslo on 10 March this year, we achieved broad international support for continuing assistance to the IGAD facilitation effort. The IPF partners are now ready to start supporting the planning process for a Southern Sudanese society as a way of following up the political progress that has been made in the negotiations. Repatriation of refugees and reconstruction of civil society are two important elements in this effort. I have high hopes for positive cooperation between the Sudanese Government and foreign aid agencies.

Good governance and conflict prevention

It is absolutely essential to consolidate a political culture that can prevent violent conflict. We can achieve this by helping to develop norms, rules and institutions for dealing with conflicts of interest without resorting to weapons. For example, we know that well-developed democratic forms of government and the rule of law tend to lessen conflict in political relations between people and states. This emphasizes the importance of strengthening good governance in countries subject to conflict. This applies both for the duration of the conflict and when it is over. Local conditions must also be taken into account here. This is especially important in stabilizing a peaceful settlement.

A government characterized by good governance is one that enjoys a high degree of legitimacy. It is inclusive, flexible and has the ability to adapt to new conditions, tasks and challenges. It encourages the participation of an active civil society. It promotes values such as pluralism, tolerance, negotiation and compromise. In other words, it is the best tool we have for preventing conflict.

We must also focus attention on social and economic inequalities and on weapons that increase oppression and insecurity. This is why action to combat anti-personnel mines and small arms is so important. The insecurity caused by these weapons may make long-term assistance difficult and humanitarian assistance impossible.

The Government is making active efforts to encourage international follow-up of the Anti-personnel Mine Ban Convention and to improve control of small arms. Norway is in the forefront on the issue of small arms together withCanada, among others. This is an element in the Lysøen cooperation between Canada and Norway on humanitarian issues and human security.

Norway’s strategy for humanitarian assistance

We have discussed these issues with leaders of UN organizations and the World Bank. International processes have been set in motion to develop a more coordinated and integrated approach. We may be on the verge of a change in paradigm in international assistance.

As I mentioned earlier, the Minister of International Development and Human Rights recently presented a new strategy for humanitarian assistance to our parliament. I hope this will prove to be a forward-looking and operative strategy that incorporates the principles I have talked about here. These are the ten points of the strategy:

1. Norwegian humanitarian assistance is based on international humanitarian law, refugee law and human rights, as laid down in internationally binding conventions.

We will seek to strengthen the integrity of humanitarian assistance and ensure the safety of relief workers, both in international fora and vis-à-vis governments and other actors in areas of conflict. We will actively help to improve international coordination in cases where difficult choices have to be made between humanitarian, political and human rights considerations (as in the case of Afghanistan).

2. Norway will continue to maintain a high level of humanitarian assistance. We will seek to mobilize greater resources to meet new needs.

We want to get more value for every dollar by concentrating on improving the quality, efficiency and coordination of humanitarian assistance. We will make active efforts to involve countries that do not contribute sufficiently in the global mobilization of resources. We will contribute to better integrated and more efficient efforts to prevent and limit natural and man-made disasters.

3. Norway will work for greater efficiency and better coordination in international humanitarian aid.

We will contribute to the further development of emergency preparedness systems and work to enhance the ability to respond rapidly to signs of crisis. We will work for better coordination at all levels - in the field, between headquarters and between capitals. We have made substantial contributions to UN coordination of humanitarian assistance, for example under the auspices of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Norway will continue to be in the forefront in advancing the process of UN reform. We wish to see further improvements in the mechanisms for joint appeals for emergency relief, coordinated efforts and strategic frameworks for humanitarian assistance. Norway will make every effort to ensure that the activities of other countries and NGOs are integrated as closely as possible through these mechanisms.

4. Norway will take the lead in developing a fully integrated approach to humanitarian assistance, peace and reconciliation, and development.

We will work actively in international fora to gain support for a fully integrated approach to coherent humanitarian efforts. We will consider whether budgetary changes should be made for the administration of Norwegian humanitarian assistance. For example, there may be a need for a more flexible use of our regional allocations earmarked for development assistance.

5. We will give high priority to conflict prevention and the consolidation of fragile peace settlements by means of strategic efforts to promote peace, reconciliation and conflict resolution.

We will continue to make use of the opportunities for peace and reconciliation initiatives provided by Norwegian humanitarian efforts. We will take a proactive approach to the further development of strategic frameworks and other coordinated efforts that will guide and integrate humanitarian assistance and political initiatives for peace and reconciliation. We will promote the effective implementation of the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Convention and further develop international initiatives to combat the proliferation of small arms and the use of child soldiers in war.

6. We will give high priority to the prevention of conflicts and disasters and the consolidation of fragile peace settlements by means of targeted poverty-oriented efforts in the fields of education, democracy and the environment.

We will review our own new initiatives to see how education can be used more strategically for conflict prevention and the consolidation of peace. We will work towards a more strategic approach to the prevention of environmental problems, the need for which is illustrated by the partly man-made floods in China and Central America. During the spring of 1999 we will draw up a plan for more effective support for democracy in the developing world and a more conscious use of democracy-building efforts in peace and reconciliation processes.

7. We will help to develop new financial mechanisms that will fill the critical resource gaps between acute emergency relief and more long-term development activities.

We will serve as a catalyst by responding rapidly when necessary to establish debt funds, as in the case of Central America after Hurricane Mitch, or other situation-specific financial mechanisms, and will make a critical assessment of the need for more permanent solutions. We will consider making proposals for improved donor cooperation in which the development banks may play a more central role.

8. We will further develop the "Norwegian model" for humanitarian assistance by making it more efficient and integrating it more closely into global humanitarian efforts.

We want the NGOs to continue to play a central role in Norwegian humanitarian assistance, provided that they function efficiently and are willing to be closely integrated into global coordination efforts. We are re-evaluating the support systems in order to give the NGOs more predictable conditions and better opportunities to plan their humanitarian assistance in a long-term perspective. We will adjust the NOREPS system in the light of the recent report, with an emphasis on greater efficiency through international competition and greater use of local and regional resources.

9. Strengthening of local capacity and local ownership will be a key condition of all Norwegian assistance, including humanitarian assistance.

We will help to give humanitarian assistance a firmer basis in human rights, emphasizing that the recipients are not only victims but also a resource to draw on. We will promote the increased use of local resources in all channels used by Norwegian humanitarian assistance, including NOREPS.

10. Norwegian humanitarian assistance is, and should be, rooted both in the moral imperative to help and protect people in need and in solidarity with those in need.

We must seek to achieve a universal approach to humanitarian crises; all people in need should have the same right to humanitarian assistance, regardless of where they are. We will place particular emphasis on solidarity with those who are no longer the subject of media interest, and help to keep the focus on "forgotten" conflicts and their victims. This is perhaps our greatest challenge.

Thank you for your attention.