1 Introduction

Honoured guests and members .

We can now look back upon one of the most dramatic years of our time. The 11th of September 2001 was the day on which reality surpassed fantasy. The cruel face of terrorism stood out more clearly. The vulnerability of civil society was starkly revealed. Thousands of innocent lives were lost. In the words of the Prime Minister in his New Year address, "Human depravity reached new depths".

The repercussions of these terrorist attacks echoed round the world. The United States is leading a new war against terrorism, a war in which Norway too will play its part. As a partner in NATO we have been asked to join our allies.

Parliamentary elections took place on 10 September. Just a few hours later the political agenda was turned totally on its head. We watched the TV screens, dumbstruck by the images we saw and incapable of grasping fully what was unfolding. As Kofi Annan put it in his speech of acceptance for the Nobel Peace Prize, "A new sense of insecurity has entered every mind, regardless of wealth or status".

And precisely because this sense of insecurity now demands to be taken seriously, we have not allowed ourselves to remain dumbstruck or incapable of action. As Minister of Defence, I have my share of responsibility for helping to ensure that people can once more feel safe. My share of responsibility for saying "enough is enough".

Scope of this address

I have come here this evening to talk about the restructuring of the Armed Forces. But it is natural that I should touch upon the subject that is perhaps foremost in the consciousness of the international community at the present time. By way of introduction, therefore, I should like to focus on the international coalition that has taken shape in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the United States.

I would also like to say a few words about how the Norwegian defence establishment has been able to respond to the new international challenges posed by the events of 11 September. Have we managed to live up to our obligations as members of the NATO Alliance? I have a responsibility for ensuring that our defence organisation is capable of making an effective contribution to the battle against terrorism. At the same time our Armed Forces must be structured to be able to meet the many other, and diverse, challenges that we may face.

Developments on the international security scene, and the challenges they entail, form the backdrop to our defence policy and will have a direct effect on how we should shape our future defence organisation. So I should like to say something about the status of the current restructuring and modernisation of the Armed Forces, and then to consider the nature of the main challenges that the future may bring.

2 International cooperation / meeting of NATO defence ministers

Rarely has the world seen the formation of such a broad international coalition as that which has emerged in the wake of 11 September, united in its condemnation of the terrorist attacks on the United States. This coalition extends across the traditional boundaries of politics, race and religion. The cooperation it entails enables a broad spectrum of assets and means to be deployed in the battle against terrorism.

Especially gratifying is the way in which states, formerly opposed to one another, have now come together in this common endeavour.

For the first time in NATO’s history, the Alliance has voted to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty. There could be no doubt that one of the Alliance countries had been attacked. This therefore constituted an attack on all the member countries of NATO, thus obliging them to assist in concert by contributing all resources necessary.

The meeting of NATO Defence Ministers that took place in Brussels at the end of December made the total unanimity existing within the Alliance even clearer to me. The terrorist attacks on the United States were seen by all the Allies as an attack on the whole of the "free world".

Here in Norway, the Government, the Storting and the majority of the Norwegian people, have been in no doubt, we wished to support the coalition and to make our contribution. There is a limit to what we can accept!

3 Has Norway lived up to expectations?

Have we, then, done our part of the job?

Yes!

I am proud of the fact that we have shown ourselves able to respond when the call has come. We have achieved much in a short time, something for which we have been praised by our allies. This shows that our Armed Forces are already well on the way to becoming both modern and flexible.

• I am proud to be able to say that a number of Norwegian special forces personnel are already on the ground in Afghanistan, supporting the Americans in the military operation "Enduring Freedom". The main body of the force is now in the process of deployment.
  Our special forces have won international renown. They undergo joint training with our allies and they have international experience. I visited the troops at Rena last week to wish them good luck in this enterprise. I was mightily impressed by the positive reception that I received and I have no doubt that they will acquit themselves with distinction.
  At Rena I also visited the technical workshops. They have worked day and night to prepare and adapt the special forces’ equipment. Among other things they have modified a number of field vehicles so extensively that they are virtually unrecognisable, especially to meet the particular requirements of the special forces. Not for nothing is the officer in charge of the workshops known as "Q" after the character in the James Bond films.
• Since 11 September our Security Service has intensified its collaboration with its counterparts in the United States.
• We have sent 2 mine clearance machines together with 15 operators to assist in clearing the airfield at Kandahar of landmines. These personnel too have international experience. Both the machines and the operators were made available on the same day that the request was received from the Americans.
• We have both an explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) team and transport management units with valuable experience from the Balkans. These have been made available to the British-led Security Assistance Force (SAF) being deployed in Afghanistan under the UN mandate. The personnel involved (25 persons) are due to leave shortly.
• Within a short time we have been able to make 15 light armoured vehicles available for operation "Enduring Freedom". These were collected by the Americans in December.
• The United States has asked for, and we have made available, a C-130 transport aircraft together with the necessary support units. This aircraft will be employed in support of operation "Enduring Freedom" and, according to current plans, will operate from the air base out at Manas in Kirgistan. We expect to fly the aircraft out within the next few weeks.
• We have offered six F-16 combat aircraft and four Bell helicopters for use in operation "Enduring Freedom".
• All these elements are well suited to the task because they have already taken part in joint training exercises and operations with our allies.
• A Norwegian frigate already form part of the Standing Naval Force Atlantic (STANAVFORLANT).
• 20 Norwegian officers are taking part in the surveillance of United States airspace as part of the deployment of the five Airborne Warning and Control (AWACS) aircraft which the NATO Council resolved to send to the United States in October last year.
• At the same time we are, in proportion to our population and overall defence budget, the largest contributor to the forces deployed in the Balkans.
• Despite the fact that the Armed Forces are in the middle of a drastic process of restructuring, we are still able to make substantial contributions to international operations in two entirely distinct regions. That is winning us considerable respect.

We can deliver, and we are good at it. This is something that I am extremely proud of and something which has not passed unnoticed by our allies. Both the NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson, and the United States Defense Secretary Rumsfeld thanked me personally for our contributions when we met at the NATO Defence Ministers meeting before Christmas.

But we can be even better. The process of restructuring has only just begun. In the future the Armed Forces will be able to play their part even better equipped than at present to tackle challenges of this kind.

As a small nation, we are especially vulnerable and so will need assistance from our allies in any war situation. It is therefore essential that we ourselves are capable of contributing to operations beyond our own borders.

National preparedness after 11 September

Since 11 September the Armed Forces have also made an important contribution to national preparedness. All service units and establishments are at a high state of alert in view of the terrorist threat. I have obtained authorisation which allows me to call up additional personnel in the event of an acute situation arising. Our combat aircraft are at a heightened state of readiness to enable them to counter any terrorist threat from the air. Certain civil defence measures have been implemented. NBC protection measures on the military side have been reviewed and service personnel have assisted a number of civil bodies with training in this area.

4 The security situation - development trends and challenges

The current security situation is both fluid and unpredictable. The risk picture has changed. The spectrum of threats and risks is broader now than hitherto. This is something we must allow for in the reshaping of our armed forces.

This requires new thinking and the will to make those choices that are essential if we are to give ourselves the freedom of action to meet these new challenges.

The events of 11 September have highlighted the challenges that must guide us in the way we shape and use our new Armed Forces.

The terrorist threat

In NATO’s Strategic Concept formulated in 1999 it is recognised that terrorism and non-state actors can pose a challenging threat to security.

The events of 11 September, and the subsequent declaration of an Article 5 situation, demonstrated this to the full. Terrorism represents a constant threat, international in nature, and a threat that potentially affects all countries.

It is not, however, a new phenomenon. Terrorism has existed for a very long time and has taken many forms. What is new is that we are confronted by forces, with offshoots in many countries, which possess a proven capability, and the will, to use all available means to spread their message. This is a frightening development. There are reports that the leaders of the al-Qa’ida network have been in possession of chemical weapons together with manuals for the manufacture of weapons of mass destruction.

The information revolution and the constant advance of technological development have made it possible for individuals and groups to exercise control of resources and networks which are unprecedented in their size and destructive capability.

Increasingly we must in future reckon on having to confront actors who will make use of so-called asymmetric strategies in order to spread fear and destruction.

Military force can contribute to the solution of this problem but force alone cannot provide the complete answer. Political, military, economic, diplomatic, police, legislative and humanitarian means must all be exploited to achieve the fullest effect. Measures have to be taken wherever terror breeds, but here at home too, we have to be able to meet this challenge.

The concept of total defence, combined with modernisation in the area of civil-military cooperation, will be important. In the same way that our armed forces need to be restructured in order to be able to counter new threats, we must also look critically at our civil defence and emergency planning. The essential question is how civil and military resources can be coordinated in the fight against terrorism and how the military can best provide aid to the civil power when needed.

NATO

NATO is our most important security buttress. Over the post-Cold War period the Alliance has evolved in response to the changing world scene and today remains both vital and dynamic. This is reflected in the aspiration of many countries to become full members of the organisation. The further accession of new members and the formation of new and closer bonds with Russia are a welcome development and one which will strengthen NATO’s role as a transatlantic forum for cooperation in matters of security and defence policy .

NATO and, in particular, Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, has shown its relevance in the context of today’s threat picture. The message from the NATO Defence Ministers’ meeting, held just before Christmas, was clear: We have to work together to develop a joint strategy to combat international terrorism. Together we must continue to develop NATO’s operational capability to enable the Alliance to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow.

Participation in operation "Enduring Freedom" and in the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan illustrates how important it is for Norwegian units to be able to operate jointly with other allied forces. Such interoperability, achieved through joint training and exercising with allied units and through further materiel modernisation, is a vital precondition if we are to be capable, in time of need, of putting the assistance received from allied reinforcements to best effect in defence of this country.

It is therefore vital that Norway should continue to embrace the goals of the Alliance and to play an active part in the work of NATO, so helping to improve the interoperability of allied forces in line with the objectives of the Defence Capability Initiative (DCI).

Developments in the EU with the accent on Norway’s interests

The EU is working towards the development of its own European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The principal aim is to have in place by 2003 a rapid reaction force of some 50-60,000 capable of deployment in support of EU-led crisis management operations.

From the Norwegian side we have supported the establishment of such a force, not least in order to ensure a more equitable distribution of the burden between Europe and the United States. Basically the force will consist of units contributed by the 15 member countries of the EU. Norway, however, as a so-called "third country", offered in autumn 2000 to contribute its Armed Forces Task Force for International Operations as an element available to the EU Rapid Reaction Force.

The EU is well on the way to having enough force contributions to enable the Rapid Reaction Force to be established, but it still lacks certain capabilities such as a strategic lift capability and adequate intelligence capacity. The EU is therefore still dependent on the use of NATO resources. This presupposes good collaborative mechanisms between NATO and the EU. The work of developing these mechanisms has until recently been at a virtual standstill. NATO is the only organisation capable of conducting operations associated with collective defence.

Despite the fact that these collaborative mechanisms have not yet been finalised, it was announced at an EU summit meeting in December that an operational EU capability for crisis management had been established. This announcement underlines the EU’s ambitions in this area.

Developments in Russia

Russia in 2001 has exhibited a degree of political stability unequalled at any time in the decade that has passed since the establishment of the Russian Federation. There is little in today’s security situation to suggest that Norway should regard Russia as a threat at the present time. In a historical perspective, relations between out two countries have been characterised by an absence of armed conflict.

Joint efforts in connection with the fight against international terrorism has, moreover, helped to make relations between NATO and Russia better than they have been for a long time. The NATO Defence Ministers’ meeting in December provided confirmation that this improvement in relations has opened the way for entirely new cooperation possibilities. We are also witnessing less outspoken Russian criticism of NATO enlargement and of United States plans for the development of a national ballistic missile defence system.

A continuing state of stable development in our neighbour to the North, combined with the increased willingness to cooperate that has been evident since 11 September, will naturally serve Norway’s security interests.

This does not, however, alter the fact that relations between Norway and Russia will for the foreseeable future be characterised by the relationship between a small country and a great power.

The environment situation on the Kola peninsular poses a range of additional challenges. These environmental problems have, among other things, created a greater need than ever for increased cooperation between our two countries. The retraining of redundant Russian officers and measures to improve the safety of sites for the storage of nuclear waste are two specific areas in which Norway is engaged in this type of cooperation.

Norway and Russia are faced with an unresolved border question in the Barents Sea. Both now and in the future we may face challenges to Norway’s role as the country exercising authority in sea areas for which Norway has administrative responsibility. At all times, therefore, we must be able to manage a situation in which Norway may possibly be subjected to pressure, either political or military. For that reason we need broad international support to help cover our backs. A Norwegian military presence in the northern regions is perhaps more important now than ever before.

5 The Government’s defence policy priorities
Overview of the future development of the Armed Forces

The security backdrop I have sketched out is a complex one. For this reason we need forces that are robust yet flexible in their ability to adapt.

To ensure the effectiveness of our future defence organisation, the structure must be mission-based and the forces themselves must be "Alliance friendly". This means firstly that the Services must be equipped with modern materiel and secondly that we have the political will to achieve a balance between missions, organisational structure and the funding provided.

Mission-based:

The missions must be balanced against one another. That means we must assess:

which are the most likely challenges that the Armed Forces will have to face, and

which of these will have the most serious consequences if the Armed Forces are not equipped to meet them.

Some of the missions of the Armed Forces are unchanging. These range from defence against possible invasion to peacetime surveillance and the exercise of Norwegian sovereignty. These will always remain the primary missions of the Armed Forces. In considering the Long-Term Plan for the Armed Forces in spring last year, the Storting accordingly made sure that the Armed Forces’ capability to carry out these tasks was strengthened in relation to the overall proposals being put forward by the Government of the day.

The Conservative Party, the Centre parties and the Progressive Party were strongly in favour of strengthening the system of military service, the Home Guard and the brigade structure. And we were the driving force in ensuring that the Navy’s MTBs would continue to form a central part of our national defences. The Labour Party, through their voting in the Storting, also supported most of these measures.

"Alliance friendly":

The future Armed Forces must be Alliance friendly, as in the NATO concept of interoperability. It is essential that Norwegian forces should be able to work closely with our allies, both at home and abroad.

This point about the ability to work closely with our allies must not be confused with the question of whether the Armed Forces should focus on national or on international activities. Participation in international operations with our allies will not only provide our own forces with the best possible training, but will at the same time motivate our allies to come to our aid here at home if the need should ever arise.

Multinational interoperation plays an important part in the modernisation both of our own defence capability and of the collective defence capability of the Alliance as a whole.

The growing need for military cooperation, reductions in the defence budgets of most countries and the rising costs associated with the development and procurement of defence materiel, have resulted to an increasing extent in groups of countries getting together to meet these common challenges. This is relevant not least to Norway and other relatively small NATO countries which, on their own, could not afford to procure and operate the many force elements normally expected of a NATO member.

The interoperation of forces on a multilateral level makes for the smoother operation of allied units and provides allied personnel with invaluable experience. We are already reaping the benefits of having had a growing proportion of our service personnel serving in an international milieu. I have been impressed by the breadth and depth of the professional skills shown by Norwegian servicemen.

For the Armed Forces to be mission-based and Alliance friendly, they need to be equipped with new and modern materiel. We must have flexible forces capable of carrying out a broad spectrum of tasks. Forces more capable of rapid reaction and with greater mobility. Continuous modernisation of the Armed Forces is important. In this context the professional skills of our personnel are of central importance and represent a critical resource.

The last decade has been characterised by a lack of political will to provide the Armed Forces with the necessary funding to enable them to carry out the missions entrusted to them. As a result we have an underfunded defence structure.

The Government has as its aim to achieve a balance between the structure of the Armed Forces and the funding allocated. This will cost money, but in common with our NATO allies we cannot afford to do otherwise.

Restructuring – status – challenges

So how are we progressing with the process of restructuring and modernisation that was endorsed on 13 June last year?

We are now one week into the restructuring period 2002-2005. A number of measures have already been initiated and are well under way.

One of the more challenging tasks we face is to bring defence operating costs under control. The aim is to achieve a levelling out of expenditure in this area, not simply to slow the rate of growth.

The big picture for this restructuring involves the closure of a number of garrisons and other service establishments. The aim here is to reduce the defence organisation’s total building stock from the present figure of approximately 6 million m ²> to about 4 million m ²> over the course of the restructuring period.

As an additional measure, as from 1 January, the administration of defence properties will be brought together under the control of a single agency, Forsvarsbygg, under the Ministry of Defence. This agency will embody leading-edge expertise covering both the buildings and the investment side and will bring the advantages of scale in both the running and the maintenance of defence properties.

Service personnel and military service:

Some reshaping in the area of personnel policy is an essential factor in the reduction of operating costs. We have to reduce personnel numbers and adopt a modern organisational structure. The aim of cutting manpower by 5000 is a very ambitious one. And while making these reductions we must at the same time ensure that the best are retained. We have to make Defence an attractive, challenging and worthwhile area in which to work. It will not be easy but it can be done. And do it we must.

All structural changes ask a lot of the personnel involved, both those who leave to work in other fields and those who remain on board. We must get better at focusing on the right things and we must concentrate on the core tasks that face us.

By co-locating the Ministry of Defence and the new Defence Staff we can achieve a better use of resources. Processes will be better coordinated and bureaucracy reduced.

The top echelons of the defence establishment will be halved. At the same time we shall streamline arrangements for strategic planning, command and control. This means that the adoption of an integrated, long-term approach will be more important than ever, and that commanders at all levels must take greater responsibility for giving priority to their core tasks.

We need a sensible and forward-looking personnel structure for the Armed Forces, and one that takes into account both professional skills and the age distribution.

Military training must be made to count for much more in the higher educational system outside. This will help in the recruiting of career officers and will provide a better platform for officers who are looking for a career change after some years in the services.

The adaptation of further education in the Armed Forces to correspond more closely with the national university and college system is also under way and I am pleased about this.

Restructuring must not be allowed to weaken our ability to take part in international operations. For this reason we want to look more closely at the arrangement for the families of personnel undertaking this type of service. I have already started work on an assessment of the need for change in the current regulations for officers and NCOs.

There is also a need to assess whether the circumstances under which we can post regular officers for international service of this kind ought to be broadened in relation to the regulations as they stand at present. I am inclined towards proposing such a change in the regulations at the earliest opportunity, once I have obtained the necessary advice, for example from the Chief of Defence.

Recruiting for the future Armed Forces is also a challenge to consider in the restructuring.

If the Armed Forces are to be able to pick the best brains, the brightest people and those with the necessary guts and drive, we need to attract both men and women. Defence must be a natural first choice. Just as it was for me when the Government posts were being decided.

I will be working to achieve the aim of 7% women among the enlisted soldiers and NCOs, and 13% women on the civilian management side by 2005. We also have to make conditions of service more attractive in order to retain the able women that we already have. And here we do have some illustrious examples to show the way. The Norwegian Navy was the first to appoint a woman as Commanding Officer of a submarine and we now have a woman serving as a fighter pilot. I am very pleased that we have women both in higher management and at the sharp end of the Armed Forces, but I would like to see still more.

The international involvement of the Armed Forces makes it especially important that our personnel are able to acquit themselves well in a multicultural environment. To achieve this, our people need some experience of diversity here at home. It is the best interests of the Armed Forces, therefore, that our ranks should include both a higher proportion of women and a higher proportion of persons with an immigrant background. The goal should be to combine increased professional skills and greater diversity to achieve a smoothly functioning defence organisation that is both effective and efficient.

The system of military service must remain one of the cornerstones of our defence, albeit with some changes We must ensure that it continues to be seen as a just and egalitarian system.

We must, however, weigh the length of the period of military service against the need for the high levels of professional skill that the Armed Forces require. To take an example, can the Home Guard manage with a shorter period of initial service if, among other things, they exercise more frequently? With this in mind the Storting has decreed that the duration of Home Guard basic training shall be 100 ‘operational’ days. Now the important thing is to find out how this can best be implemented in practice and how we can make best use of the resources within the structure laid down.

The Storting has asked us to assess whether a third category of military service should be introduced. We have conducted a preliminary study and concluded that it may be possible to find solutions within the concept of Total Defence. It is therefore natural that the Ministry of Justice should take the lead in further studies of such an alternative form of military service in the light of the Vulnerability Commission’s report.

The modernisation of Armed Forces materiel

Modern defence forces must have modern equipment. Our future procurements must therefore reflect the requirements of the Defence Capability Initiative endorsed at the Washington summit. The development and procurement costs of new defence materiel are in many instances so enormous that the only solution is to share the burden with allies in the fairest way possible. Collaborative projects for the procurement of new defence equipment also help to lay the foundations for closer cooperation on an operational level as the new materiel is brought into service. Moreover, such projects allow more effective use to be made of the collective resources of the collaborative partners.

So which actual materiel projects, planned or approved, have we got in the pipeline?

• The building of the first of five new Fridtjof Nansen Class frigates is starting just about now. The vessel is due to be handed over in 2005. After that, one frigate will be delivered each year over the period until 2009. These ships and their weapon systems are designed to be able to operate both in coastal waters and on the high seas and they will be deployed both on missions in Norwegian waters and on international operations. I have great faith in these vessels and I will be in Spain later this month visiting the yard where they are being built.
• Shortly before Christmas I christened the Coast Guard’s new flagship, CGV Svalbard. This ship represents a significant strengthening of the Coast Guard and, with its specially strengthened hull, will be particularly well suited to operations in the ice conditions found in the extreme north of the Coast Guard’s area of responsibility. I myself grew up on Norway’s coast and I am very conscious of how important it is to exercise our sovereignty in Norwegian waters and to have the capability of keeping them under surveillance, ready to respond quickly to any need. The importance of our sea areas can only increase in the years to come.
• New marine helicopters are to be purchased, six to operate with the Navy’s new frigates and eight Lynx replacements for use by the Coast Guard. The shipborne helicopters will provide the frigates with a new operational dimension and one which represents a decisive factor in naval operations today. For the Coast Guard, the new helicopters will increase each vessel’s radius of operation while also improving the Coast Guard’s capability for surveillance and monitoring and, not least, for search and rescue missions. Helicopter deliveries commence in autumn 2005 with delivery of the last aircraft in 2008.
  
• When considering the Long-Term Plan for the Armed Forces, the Storting resolved that preparations should be put in hand for the procurement of new combat aircraft for the Norwegian Air Force. The Government will be following up this resolution and is now in the process of establishing a strategy for the implementation of the replacement of the existing F-16 MLU aircraft. The new combat aircraft project will represent the Armed Forces’ largest ever single procurement. The acquisition of these aircraft must be completed some time between 2010 and 2018. In the work that lies ahead it is essential that we should ensure the greatest possible freedom of action for as long as possible.
  At the same time, Norway must take account of the possible advantages – operational, financial and industrial – that could accrue from early commitment to a joint procurement project with other countries whose needs are similar. The United States JSF project (Joint Strike Fighter) and a further development of the Eurofighter are both possibilities but other candidates will also be considered.
• Following a request from the United States, KNM Skjold, the first of a new class of stealth technology FAC (Fast Attack Craft), has been lent for one year to the US Navy and US Coast Guard. The vessel will undergo a comprehensive series of evaluation trials over this period. Compared with the Hauk class, the Skjold class is capable of carrying out a wider range of missions, a feature which is in line with NATO’s DCI requirements. the fact that the United States is interested in this vessel is in itself a mark of its quality.
  The Government intends to present a project proposal to the Storting during the course of the coming spring. It would be desirable to be able to conclude a contract in the course of this year, subject to Storting endorsement and the success of contract negotiations with the supplier.
• The Armed Forces have reached a decision point regarding their future needs for transport aircraft capacity. From an operational standpoint, our present C-130 Hercules transport aircraft are poor. A study has therefore been initiated to examine the various ways in which our future air lift capacity needs could be met, including possible international solutions. Shortly before Christmas, a working group submitted a report setting out an assessment of the possible solutions, some of which could also cover our future needs for in-flight refuelling. We are now assessing the report’s content and will be submitting our conclusions in the spring (in the Spring Proposition to the Storting).

In future, when allocating priorities between major procurement investments, I shall – as I have already mentioned – endeavour to see that our decisions are in line with the Alliance aims set out in the DCI, in other words that they contribute towards enhancing interoperability within the Alliance.

Strategic sealift capacity, a resource important to Norway in the context of NATO cooperation, is also central to the DCI concept of ‘mobility and deployability’. Very shortly Norway will be concluding emergency planning contracts covering strategic sealift capacity. This will provide NATO with an important capability which could be called upon if the need should arise. Norway is a driving force in improving the Alliance’s total sealift capacity, the aim being to make better use of the available resources.

The requirements for interoperability and the need for cooperation in fields such as training, maintenance and the updating of materiel already in service are increasing. This will have consequences where Norway’s choice of collaborative projects is concerned.

A recent example of such collaboration is the contract for the supply of helicopters for the new frigates and the Coast Guard. Norway signed the contract on 30 November last year and the procurement project will be run in conjunction with Finland and Sweden.

Norway is actively involved in NATO’s work in the area of airborne ground surveillance. I would also like to make reference to the project for a new short range air-to-air missile for our "Mid-life Update" F-16 combat aircraft where we are looking at the possibility of a joint project with the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Portugal. Other exciting possibilities for future collaboration could include, for example, unmanned aircraft or so-called UAVs.

6 Conclusions

In March this year I shall be submitting a Proposition to the Storting containing proposals for the necessary adjustments and changes to our defence structure and for the way in which these will be financed. The new cost calculations, based on the Storting’s resolution following consideration of the Long-Term Plan for the Armed Forces, have shown that the structure endorsed will cost substantially more than previously anticipated.

The purpose of the Spring Proposition is to strike a balance between the structure and its financing. Predictability is essential if we are to achieve this. This presupposes broad agreement regarding Norway’s defence policy. The degree of unanimity reached in the Storting last autumn, when the annual defence budget was considered, was an important step in the right direction. This gives us a good foundation on which to build. The budget endorsed for 2002 is satisfactory and sufficient to allow a start to be made on the approved restructuring, but no more than that.

The terrorist attacks of 11 September have highlighted the prevention and combating of terrorism both as an acute need and as a long-term task. In the coming Proposition, therefore, I shall also assess the need to adopt extraordinary measures against the terrorist threat.

Work on the Spring Proposition will be taking up most of my time, and that of the Ministry of Defence, over the coming months.

At the same time I will be working hard to ensure that the Armed Forces are allocated the funding that they must have if they are to be able to fulfil our obligations and realise our ambitions, both nationally and internationally.

Regardless of the tug-of-war for budget funds, we must constantly keep our work focused on the restructuring of our defence. If we fail in this, much will be lost, irrespective of how much taxpayers’ money we allocate to defence in the years to come.

We must stand together in the cause of creating a defence organisation that is truly oriented towards the future, with Armed Forces that are both flexible and effective. We must stand together in preserving and developing Armed Forces that we can be proud of. Together we can make Norway’s defence establishment, including the Armed Forces themselves, a workplace that is both highly attractive, challenging and very, very worthwhile.
Together we can do it!

Thank you for your kind attention.