Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Kim Traavik

Norwegian policy in the Caucasus and Central Asia

NUPI seminar, Oslo, 10. June 2004

Central Asia and the Caucasus are attracting increased international attention, and rightly so.

In the case of Central Asia, this is first of all attributable to the region’s proximity to Afghanistan and its strategic importance in the fight against terrorism.

But secondly, there is a widely shared concern that, in the absence of much-needed democratic reforms and economic development, the countries of the region could become breeding grounds for the kind of frustration and extremism that nurtured the Taliban and Al Queda.

And thirdly, there is also a growing concern as regards trafficking in drugs through the region. The inflow of opium and heroin from Afghanistan has a debilitating effect on Central Asian societies. But eventually most of these drugs will of course end up on the streets of London, Paris, and Oslo.

In many respects, then, the picture is rather bleak as far as Central Asia is concerned. In the case of the Caucasus, it seems to me, there are more shades and nuances.

The good news is the “rose revolution” in Georgia. A young, energetic president has taken charge, with the support of more than 90% of the electorate. Still, Georgia’s troubles are not over.

The economy is in ruins. And while the crisis over Adjaria was peacefully resolved, Abkhazia and South Ossetia remain significant challenges for the new government. Although the bilateral relations between Russia and Georgia have improved, there appears to be little if any progress on the withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia.

Yet a new beginning has been made. President Saakashvili has obtained an exceptionally strong mandate to push for political, economic, and social reforms long overdue. It is crucial that he succeeds, for Georgia, for the region, and for the broader international community. So far, the new Georgian leaders seem to be getting the international support they clearly need and richly deserve. We in Norway are committed to doing our share.

But the case of Georgia notwithstanding, from an overall point of view the Caucasus continues to be a troubled region.

Nagorno Karabakh remains a festering sore, causing tension between Armenia and Azerbaijan and abject misery to hundreds of thousands of IDPs. The peace process, facilitiated by the OSCE Minsk Group, seemingly has ground to a more or less complete stop.

And the countries of the region continue to grapple with the legacy of the Communist past as well as the after-effects of conflicts following the break-up of the Soviet Union. This is true, of course, also with regard to the countries of Central Asia. Economic development is sluggish at best. Poverty is endemic. There are deep social strains and divisions.

And although different in many respects, the governments of the two regions have generally been heavy-handed, not to say repressive, in their response to opposition and dissidence.

Compliance with human rights and rule of law commitments generally has been and remains deeply unsatisfactory, particularly in countries such as Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. In Azerbaijan, too, there are serious human rights problems. In some respects the situation in Azerbaijan has further deteriorated in the aftermath of the presidential elections last fall.

Yet all these countries have freely undertaken to implement OSCE human rights and rule of law commitments while the countries of the South Caucasus in addition are bound by Council of Europe standards.

This poses a dilemma for Western governments which is further aggravated by the fact that the countries of the two regions, and particularly those of Central Asia, are significant contributors to the fight against terrorism and the efforts to prevent proliferation of weapons and materials of mass destruction.

It is understandable that some in the NGO community are uneasy about this, particularly as regards Central Asia. Concerns have been expressed that the international community has turned a blind eye on repression and human rights violations in order not to alienate important partners.

While some of these allegations have been exaggerated, I think there is no denying that some international reactions to human rights violations in Central Asia have been somewhat muted in the post-9/11 period. The same has been true as regards international reactions to events in the wake of the presidential election in Azerbaijan.

To my mind, this kind of excessive caution is regrettable, for it may convey the unintended message that the international community does not feel strongly about the observance of human rights, does not feel strongly about the rule of law, and does not feel strongly about due process.

But having said this, I will immediately add that speaking out is important, but it does not make a policy in and of itself. Merely hitting your interlocutor about the head is rarely conducive to building a constructive relationship.

In my view we need a two-track approach. In addition to pointing out human rights shortcomings and infringements, we must also engage the countries concerned in constructive dialogue and practical cooperation.

And this kind of dialogue and cooperation must include not only democratic reforms. In order to be viable and constructive it has to encompass issues of primary concern also to the other side.

In so far as Central Asia is concerned, this is of course a familiar issue. The very decision to invite the countries of the region, in the early nineties, to join the OSCE was predicated on the idea that membership should mainly be used to promote western values. Hence, the emphasis of the OSCE in the beginning was almost exclusively on the human dimension.

But it soon became clear that this approach did not work. Where the OSCE offered human rights and the rule of law, the Central Asians asked for economic cooperation and aid. As a result, the relationship was not going anywhere.

Gradually, the OSCE approach to Central Asia has become more balanced. Not in the sense of down-playing the human dimension. Human rights and the rule of law remain at the core of the organization’s policy. Rather, the OSCE approach has become more balanced in the sense that security-related as well as economic and environmental issues have become more important parts of the OSCE’s activities .

It was realized, in other words, that it was essential to create incentives for the Central Asian countries themselves to carry out much-needed reforms. And those incentives were essentially to be found in economic development and dealing with the daunting environmental problems that are part of the Soviet legacy.

In my view the rationale for the reorientation of the OSCE’s approach to Central Asia remains as valid today as it was in the late nineties. We still need a balanced aproach, to Central Asia and to the Caucasus, in the sense I have just outlined.

As already noted, conditions in individual countries differ widely. Generalization is dangerous, of course. But in terms of promoting a positive development in both regions, I see five particularly urgent priorities.

First, we in the international community must step up our efforts to facilitate and promote the emergence of sustainable, solid civil societies.

Grass-roots organizations and truly independent media are of course desperately needed if democracy is to take hold in these countries. The OSCE and the Council of Europe have been doing some excellent work in these areas, but much more could and should be done. And let there be no mistake about it: This will be a long-term effort.

Second, we need to do more to facilitate and promote security-sector reform.

No democracy will be safe and sustainable in the absence of democratic control of armed forces. There will be no rule of law unless the police respects basic rights, and there will be no equality under the law unless judges and prosecutors are incorruptible. This, too, will of course be a long-term effort.

Third, we need to do more to facilitate and support efforts to roll back organized crime, which is a major problem in the countries of the two regions.

Trafficking in drugs, arms, and – most abhorrent of all – women and children – are of course multi-million dollars industries. As a rule, the crime networks are much better organized than the police. And they are usually capable of much more efficient cross-border cooperation than the law enforcement agencies trying to curb their activities.

Since much of the trafficked drugs and many trafficking victims end up in Western countries, including Norway, this is an area in which we have a very obvious self-interest in supporting the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus.

Fourth, the international community needs to be more active and forceful in promoting regional cooperation.

Many of the most intractable problems facing the region – be they related to the environment, water rights or the fight against organized crime - are trans-boundary in character. Trade and economic development will obviously be very difficult in a situation where borders are essentially closed and scheduled air-links are missing.

An obvious reponse to cross-border challenges should logically be regional cooperation. Yet many of the countries of the two regions are resisting this. Political rivalries and suspicions have mitigated against regional cooperation in the past, and still do.

And fifth, more needs to be done to alleviate the suffering of IDPs and refugees.

The primary responsibility for this rests squarely with the governments concerned. The plight of the IDPs must not be used for propaganda purposes. But the international community is not paying enough attention, either.

One million men,women, and children have been forced to flee their homes and relocate as a result of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict alone. I have seen for myself their misery and suffering. International humanitarian organizations, including some Norwegian ones represented here today, are doing a tremendous job. Let me pay tribute to their untiring efforts. The Norwegian government is committed to continuing its economic support to the relief efforts.

But the best way of helping the IDPs and refugees would of course be the resolution of the conflicts that caused their uprooting in the first place. That, too, of course is primarily up to the parties themselves.

As for Nagorno Karabakh, we hope that the present impasse will be broken and that the parties will soon resume the kind of direct contacts at the highest political level that led to progress a few years ago. The international community, through the co-chairmanship of the Minsk Group will of course continue to support the process.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Clearly, the international community is facing significant challenges in the Caucasus and Central Asia. The Norwegian response is essentially three-tiered: First, we will maintain our support to enhancing the ties between international organizations such as the UN, NATO, and the EU and the countries of the two regions. Second, we are strengthening our bilateral relations with the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia. And third, we are increasing our economic support and project cooperation, largely through co-operation with international organizations and NGOs.

Against this backdrop, we are gratified that both NATO and the European Union are committed to engaging the countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia in structured, concrete, and ever closer cooperation.

Nato’s partnerships contribute significantly to democratic reform and security cooperation across the euro-atlantic area. At the upcoming NATO summit in Istanbul, there will be a particular focus on the alliance’s partners in central Asia and the Caucasus, with special emphasis on security sector reform and other security-related issues.

Strengthening nato’s security partnerships with the countries of the two regions is important in the context of our response to the most pressing threats to international security. As noted, these countries are in a position to make significant contributions to the fight against international terrorism and the efforts to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction.

We applaud furthermore the commitment of the eu to bring the countries on its new external borders closer to it. The new neighbourhood policy programmes will be important instruments to foster and promote democratic reform and economic development.

Later this month european council is likely to endorse inclusion of the countries of the south caucasus in the new neighbours policy. This clearly will provide new impetus to democratic and economic reforms in the three countries. We for our part are committed to close cooperation with the eu on the achievement of the objectives of the new neighbours policy.

On 12 ^th> May Norway took over the Chairmanship of the Ministerial Committee of the Council of Europe for the next six months. One of the priorities of the Norwegian chairmanship will be to strengthen the Council’s role in promoting democracy and human rights, good governance and conflict prevention, in the countries of the Caucasus as well as in other member states. And in Central Asia the UN and the OSCE are of course key players with whom we cooperate closely.

We have allocated about 10 million euro for projects in the South Caucasus. The money is spent mainly on projects in the humanitarian area. In most cases the projects are managed by the Norwegian refugee council, which is doing a superb job in all the three countries of the region. Other main areas of project co-operation are energy efficiency, health, trafficking, free press and minority issues.

This year we have increase our funding for projects in Georgia substantially, in order to support the reforms undertaken by the new government. In Georgia we want to increase in particular our funding of projects for judiciary reform.

A word also on the situation in Chechnya, which continues to be cause for concern. There can be no justification for terrorist attacks such as the one in the Grozny stadium last month. Russia has a legitimate right to defend itself against terrorism. But security needs must be addressed within international law and in scrupulous compliance with human rights. Russia must hold accountable any member of its military forces guilty of human rights violations. This tragic conflict can only be resolved on the basis of a political settlement in the context of Russia’s territorial integrity. We hope the presidential elections this fall will be free and fair.

In cooperation primarily with the UN and Norwegian NGOs we will continue our humanitarian efforts, mostly in support of IDPs in neighbouring Ingushetia. In addition we will support a UNESCO project aiming to rebuild schools in Chechnya. The security situation and the lack of a permanent international presence in Chechnya are obstacles to the humanitarian effort, but we hope that will change with time.

And through our Chairmanship of the Council of Europe, we will follow up actively on the bilateral co-operation programme with Russia on reforms in Chechnya. We look forward to the report of the PACE Human Rights rapporteurs after their recent visit in the region.

In Central Asia, we will be focussing mostly on security and the environment. The increase in illegal trade and trafficking of human beings, weapons, drugs and a weakened police and border control represent challenges to all of us. Joint efforts to deal with the combination of poverty and authoritarianism in the region are sorely needed.

Norway contributes substantially to the OSCE police training program in Kyrgyzstan. This program has been quite successful, and I think we need to widen the scope here. We are also among the main contributors, through the UNODC, to the efforts to curb drug trafficking, primarily in Tajikistan. To that end we are also supporting an upgrading of border controls between Uzbekistan and Afghanistan. Norway is also financing the first comprehensive regional mapping project on trafficking in humans in Central Asia.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

My aim this morning has been to provide you with an overview of the situation in the Caucasus and Central Asia and the Norwegian response to it. The situation is rife with challenges and dilemmas. In the face of those challenges and dilemmas there is no alternative to a balanced approach, combining broad engagement and ever closer cooperation with dialogue that at times will necessarily have to be direct and critical.

But let us harbour no illusions. The countries of the Caucasus and Central Asia are young nations with a troubled past and a challenging future. The road to stable democracy will be long and rocky.

Thank you.