Ladies and gentlemen,

First, thank you for inviting me to this lunch-seminar. It is a great pleasure to be with you here in the Shippingclub. I am pleased to see a number of familiar faces in the room, among them my old friends Øyvind Riseng and Finn Røgenæs. Shipping of course represents a major part of Norway’s international activity and constitutes an important share of our economy. I’m glad to note your interest in Norway’s foreign and security policy more generally. Even though shipping is no longer handled on a day to day basis by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the sea has always been and remains the primary meetingplace between Norway’s strongest economic and foreign policy interests.

Today of course is the anniversary of one of the darkest days of Norwegian history. From that sombre perspective it is highly appropriate that we should meet in a maritime forum such as this. The merchant navy was without any doubt Norway’s most important contribution to Allied victory in World War II. The Norwegian Merchant Fleet provided the economic basis of our government in exile as well as a truly vital contribution to the supply lines of our allies. But it came at a high cost. Several thousand Norwegian seamen lost their lives in the course of the war.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I will concentrate my remarks on issues related to NATO, the EU and in Norway’s relations with Russia, against the backdrop of current security policy challenges.

The terrorist attacks on 11 September changed, in a dramatic manner, basic precepts for foreign and security policy-making. It challenged international security in a way that was impossible to foresee. The situation called for broad engagement, determination, creativity and tenacity. At the same time, 11 September gave a boost to the ongoing transformation processes in international security policy. It strongly underscored the inherent political value of international cooperation.

Our location at a geostrategic crossroads between the Atlantic Ocean, Russia and Continental Europe has historically been an incentive for Norwegians to promote and facilitate cooperation - between Europe and North America as well as between East and West.

NATO remains a key element in Norwegian foreign and security policy. From the Norwegian perspective NATO’s overriding purpose continues to be safeguarding the freedom and security of all its members. To us, this is not a trivial or ritual consideration. The core functions of security, consultation, deterrence and defence remain vital to us. At the same time, we have also welcomed NATO’s willingness to take on the essential tasks of crisis management and partnership cooperation among the countries in the Euro-Atlantic area. Indeed, we see these tasks as strongly supportive of the original functions of the Alliance.

Flexible and capable defence forces is an indispensable part of our ability to fulfil our tasks. This recognition forms the point of departure for the ongoing transformation of the Norwegian defence forces. International crisis management, be it NATO- or EU-led, will necessarily be a high priority in the years ahead, also in order to maintain our own security.

NATO’s partnership programmes have contributed to greater understanding and less tension across the old divide in Europe. In parallel, they have also prepared the ground for very practical co-operation on the ground in peace operations in the Western Balkans. Indeed this is an embodiment of the two-pronged Alliance approach to European stability: crisis management in places like Kosovo and Macedonia and crisis prevention by means of a comprehensive network of political and practical co-operation all through the Euro-Atlantic area. Overall, NATO has been extremely successful in this approach in cooperation with the European Union. Along with the recent actions taken in the fight against terrorism, this has substantiated NATO’s claim to be an essential force for security and stability in Europe.

The way in which the security challenges of the Post Cold War world has been dealt with demonstrates the need for Europe and North America to stand together in resolving tasks that require concerted action. By the same token, the European countries will have to assume a greater share of the responsibility for security in Europe.

We are convinced that the European Union has an important role to play in that regard. The EU has a broad range of programmes that make a substantial contribution to economic growth and social stability in Central and Eastern Europe. EU membership for these countries will further strengthen the stability and prosperity of their societies and thereby safeguard the security and stability of Europe as a whole.

We are, furthermore, convinced that the EU has an important role to play in the fight against terrorism. Terrorism must be fought on many fronts, including military, political, diplomatic, legal and economic means. We therefore welcome the EU cooperation with NATO, the EU Plan of Action for the fight against terrorism, and the EU humanitarian efforts to assist the Afghan people.

Norway has been a strong supporter of the development of a European Security and Defence Identity since the concept was introduced within NATO a number of years ago. All along, we have supported the EU’s efforts to strengthen its role in security and defence through the development of European crisis management capabilities. We have welcomed the decision by the EU to take on the international police mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina when the UN-IPTF mandate ends by the end of this year, and have offered to contribute to it. The need for a European crisis management capability is clear enough and Norway has all the time seen this process as beneficial to our own security. We have committed substantial military and police forces towards the fulfilment of the EU Headline Goal.

We regret, however, that agreement between the EU and NATO on EU access to NATO resources has been slow in coming. We have argued that NATO and the EU must co-operate closely at all levels in order to ensure the best possible use of available resources. We have worked for a generous offer of support from NATO as regards EU access to NATO’s assets and capabilities in EU-led operations. We have welcomed the arrangements offered for the participation of third countries - notably the six non-EU European Allies - in the ESDP process and future EU-led operations as a good basis for a close and cooperative relationship.

We appreciate the support that the United States has given to the ESDP. This is a crucial condition for its success. We agree with the US that the ESDP will be of benefit to European security to the extent that it actually brings added European crisis management capabilities and to the extent that it is developed in close co-ordination with NATO. That this is a strong and valid point has been driven home to us over the last months, witness the international solidarity in the fight against terrorism, but also in the efforts to build stability in the Balkans. The fine-tuned cooperation between the EU and NATO was a decisive contribution to the efforts to bring Macedonia back from the brink of disaster.

US involvement in European security will remain essential. But as we see it, an increase in the European capability to take on the task of securing peace and stability on the European continent can only be beneficial to transatlantic burdensharing and to our common understanding of the challenges at hand.

In the month ahead, I think we will find transatlantic relations at the heart of the debate on the future of the Alliance. They have proven their durability in the months following the terrorist attack on the United States. But it is equally clear that the trans-Atlantic relationship cannot be taken for granted. It needs to be nurtured, on both sides of the Atlantic. There are real challenges facing us, both politically and in terms of concrete defense and security requirements, not least in regards new, asymmetrical threats to our common security.

Hence, the Alliance finds itself at a crucial historical juncture. The upcoming Prague NATO summit will be an enlargement summit as well as a NATO- Russia summit. (I will revert to both these issues in a moment). But at Prague the Alliance will also have to send a clear and convincing signal that it is capable of adapting once more to a changing security environment. This is no mean challenge. But, I have no doubt that the Alliance will prove up to the task.

Norway presently is also a member of the UN Security Council. The fight against terrorism, conflict prevention, a more integrated approach to peace-keeping operations and the strengthening of the ability of the UN to plan and implement such operations are among our key priorities in this context. The UN is an important instrument in the fight against terrorism. The fight against terrorism must be approached on many fronts and in a global spirit. The broad international coalition has been a key instrument in this fight and we consider it important that it is maintained in the months ahead.

Russia is unique among NATO's partners and has always been so. The Alliance was created to counter the threat from the Soviet Union and was completely transformed as a result not at least of Russia’s own transformation. Since then, the NATO-Russia relationship has had its ups and downs, the Kosovo crisis definitely being a down. The 11 September and its aftermath further strengthened a new approach from Russia towards the West which we had seen coming for some time, but which was definitely much more strongly accentuated through the common fight against terrorism. Who would have thought that Russia would acquiesce in US military presence in Central Asia, Russia’s backyard?

One should not forget the pivotal role of President Putin in this. He has demonstrated a clear and determined desire to tie Russia closer to the West. Russia’s interests will always be her own, and they will not always coincide with those of the NATO countries. But the terrorist attack on America clearly highlighted the genuine benefits of co-operation between Russia and the West. To us, this is an opportunity to be seized with determination and perseverance. We should further strengthen cooperation between the Alliance and Russia, both politically and from a practical point of view.

NATO-Russia relations are of particular importance to Norway as a neighbouring country to Russia. Norway has for many years now been committed to developing the bilateral relationship as much as circumstances allow. We are determined to make good use of the opportunities for consolidating and further strengthening the bilateral relationship opened by the general rapprochement between Russia and its western partners. President Putin’s visit to Norway this fall will also allow us an opportunity to bring the relationship forward. Such bilateral efforts must be reinforced by efforts in other fora, including by the establishment of a new cooperation forum, which is planned for NATO’s ministerial meeting in Reykjavik in May. Norway is firmly behind this effort to provide the NATO-Russia relationship with a more solid foundation.

We strongly support NATO's Open Door Policy, and would like to see new invitations issued at Nato’s Summit meeting in Prague in November. Until then and beyond that day, it is important that the candidates' efforts are kept up, so that the new members are able to assume the obligations of membership and make their contribution to the security of the Alliance.

It is fundamental to Norway that all countries have an inherent right to choose the means to ensure their own security. At the same time, we must maintain the credibility of NATO as an alliance. Norway supports the aspirations of all candidates. We work particularly closely with the Baltic States, to safeguard their interests in the enlargement process. In our view, Baltic membership will serve to strengthen European stability and security. We stress to our Allies that all candidates - including the three Baltic countries - must be measured by the same yardstick, regardless of history or geographic location. From our point of views, the enlargement perspective should be an inclusive one, from the Baltic to the Black Sea.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Our efforts towards integration of Russia and the other partners illustrate the close connection between work we do through broader European and transatlantic organisations and work we do regionally.

The Barents co-operation is unique in the sense that it is based on local initiatives. It comprises the northern counties of Norway, Sweden and Finland, as well as Karelia and the Murmansk, Arkhangelsk and Komi in Russia. It does not encompass security issues in the traditional sense, but it does have implications for security in a broader perspective. Regional co-operation has a great potential in the Nordic-Baltic area as well, supplementing activities in broader organisations and contributing to economic and social reform and to enhanced openness and confidence. Norway also takes an active part in the work of the Baltic Sea Council, where the Baltic and Nordic countries are joined by Russia, Poland, Germany and the European Union.

The Nordic Council is an example of how old structures are adapted to new challenges. During the Cold War European security was never on the Nordic agenda, due to different security alignments. Nowadays, an ever-closer dialogue and co-operation on such issues is developing. A good example is the very constructive NORCAPS co-operation, which today also includes the UK, and which has been mentioned as a possible model for creating the capabilities needed in the future EU-led operations.

I have covered a broad agenda in quite a short time, and I am more than willing to elaborate on issues of particular interest to you. So I would welcome your comments and questions.