Check against delivery

Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen,

Thank you for inviting me to address the China Institute of International Studies Forum – and for giving me this opportunity to exchange views with such a distinguished gathering of scholars, diplomats and journalists on how to promote and work together for international peace and security.

I am concluding two days of political talks in Beijing on this – my first visit to China as a minister. I am on my way to Shanghai this afternoon, with Hong Kong SAR to follow. I am impressed by the social and economic progress I am seeing, and I am pleased to note the commitment expressed by China’s leaders to world peace, sustainable development and international co-operation.

My mission here is to consolidate our ongoing co-operation, explore new avenues for co-operation and to learn more about China. As you say here; seeing a thing once is better than reading about it a thousand times.

- - - - -

I will begin my speech here today by saying a few words about Norway’s bilateral relations with China.

Our relations date back more than half a century, they are close and they are very promising for the future. When Norway recognised the People’s Republic in January 1950, it was one of the very first Western countries to do so. Last year we celebrated 50 years of diplomatic relations between Norway and China, with Chairman Wu Banguo visiting Norway and the president of our parliament, Jørgen Kosmo, visiting China.

China has grown to become Norway’s fourth biggest trading partner. With last year’s ADS tourism agreement and a sharp increase in student exchanges, our contacts have never been better or broader.

In the course of the first six months of 2005, six members of the Norwegian Government will have visited China. This illustrates the strength and scope of our political contacts and co-operation.

A small nation like Norway and a great power like China have more in common than one might think given our differences and the distance between us.

We share many of the same security concerns. In today’s world, security means more than securing borders from external attacks.

Today’s threats to peace and stability come from poverty, from environmental pressures, population movements, and from the spread of diseases and from international terrorism.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said that “safeguarding the environment is one of the foundations of peace and security”. I also noted with interest the emphasis Premier Wen Jiabao put on the relationship between “man and nature” in his speech to the National People’s Congress earlier this month. There can be no true peace unless we also make peace with nature.

Therefore I am pleased to note the co-operation between Norway and China in the environmental field. Norway last year welcomed the establishment of a permanent Chinese scientific station on Svalbard (Spitsbergen). Recent research shows alarming climate changes taking place in the Arctic. Norway wishes to increase our co-operation with China in the field of climate change.

We are also very pleased with our co-operation in another important field of common concern. The human rights dialogue between Norway and China, held at vice-ministerial level, goes back to 1993. Since 1997 we have had formal roundtables on human rights every year, which have been headed at political level.

I believe that the strength of the dialogue lies in the opportunity it provides for building networks between the participants at different levels, including politicians, academics, non-governmental organisations and representatives of the judicial system.

These contacts and networks make it possible for us to exchange information, concerns and criticism within a framework of mutual trust. It is my strong belief that this, with the passage of time, promotes understanding and the achievement of positive results.

The co-operation between Norway and China started out as a dialogue between the respective Ministries of Foreign Affairs, but has evolved and developed both in scope and size. The Norwegian delegation to the roundtable in Beijing in June last year counted 26 members, among them NGOs such as Amnesty International and the Helsinki Committee and officials from the Parliamentary Ombudsman, the Supreme Court, the Attorney General’s Office and different ministries.

The Norwegians and their Chinese counterparts have undertaken a wide range of project activities on the key topics of the dialogue. One example is the Sino-Nordic working group, led by the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights, which developed the first comprehensive textbook in Chinese on international human rights. The book is currently being used by 27 universities in China.

An important aspect of the dialogue is that it is inclusive and outward looking.

Norway, China and Canada host a common symposium on human rights. Last December 20 countries met in Hanoi for the sixth symposium, with broad participation from the Asian countries. The Symposium also has a roundtable format, and last year’s topics were women’s rights, freedom of speech, corporate social responsibility and the impact of globalisation on human rights.

Norway attaches great importance to the human rights dialogue with China, and I look forward to welcoming the Chinese delegation to the ninth roundtable on human rights in Oslo in June.

-------------

As members of “the global village” both Norway and China are concerned with the broader issues of reducing poverty, protecting the environment and promoting peace and stability. And we are both concerned with the prosperity and welfare of our citizens.

The present threats and challenges are of a global nature. Security is indivisible. International engagement is an investment in our own security.

A small country like Norway can only safeguard its security and its national interests through multilateral co-operation. We therefore seek multilateral solutions wherever possible. We will continue to provide ideas, military and civilian resources and humanitarian and economic support for such joint endeavors. We will remain strongly committed to the United Nations.

Our participation in the North Atlantic Alliance is a cornerstone for Norwegian security. The transatlantic ties are vital to our success in countering international terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. NATO’s partners include some of China’s neighbors. This demonstrates how the Alliance has adjusted itself to a new security environment.

Although Norway has chosen to remain outside the EU, close co-operation in Europe is of great importance for our foreign policy. The EU plays a significant role in ensuring peace, security and democracy in the whole of Europe. We therefore work closely with the EU not only on economic issues, but also when it comes to EU’s security and defense policy.

The efforts to achieve a world based on binding international co-operation, international law and freedom from want and strife are clearly in our own self-interest.

- - - - -

Globalisation has proved to be a double-edged sword. On the one hand it has had the positive effect of bringing the countries of the world closer together through the flow of trade, investments, news and ideas.

On the other hand instability and insecurity also flow freely. The effects of internal conflicts spread beyond the immediate site of the conflict by means of migration, environmental degradation, international organised crime and international terrorism.

The first victims of armed conflicts are more often the fundamental principles of human rights, international humanitarian law and the right of every individual to basic freedoms. These principles are – in my view – important cornerstones in our own societies.

To sum up, internal conflicts have become a global concern. They challenge the basis of a stable state system through their destabilising effect on individual states.

Norway is therefore engaged in preventing conflicts, resolving conflicts and rebuilding societies that have been ravaged by conflicts.

Peace diplomacy is one instrument in our quest for peace.

But the quest for peace is also very much about building and strengthening alliances and partnerships. It is about providing development assistance, ensuring good governance and respect for human rights, but also using military means when the situation calls for it.

We have idealistic goals for our policy: lasting peace, respect for universal human rights, and a life in dignity for all. At the same time we have to be pragmatic with regard to the means we employ to achieve them.

Afghanistan is a concrete example of the fact that it is sometimes necessary to use military means to secure peace. The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, ISAF, was a decisive factor in the success of the presidential election. One of the main tasks now is to facilitate the parliamentary elections later this year.

NATO must therefore continue to help ensure stability and security in Afghanistan. This is the main reason why ISAF’s reach is to be gradually extended to other provinces in the course of this year. Norway will continue to make a substantial contribution to this operation.

Our common fight against global threats can only succeed if we all pool our resources and pursue the same objectives. Addressing these threats requires a comprehensive range of foreign policy instruments – military, political, and economic. No single institution can provide all of those instruments. We must make full use of international and regional organisations in meeting these threats.

Norway sees international peace and development as two sides of the same coin. There can be no real development without security, and long-term security can only be achieved through development and respect for democratic values.

A vital task for the international community is therefore to mobilise the necessary political attention and financial resources to engage strategically and effectively in conflict-affected and fragile states. We must not forget that reconciliation, credible institutions and financial stability are as important to peace and security as the deployment of troops.

Norway wants to be a constructive and active partner in international peace-building efforts. And we want to broaden the focus from traditional post-conflict peace building to countries and regions threatened by, undergoing, or emerging from violent conflict.

International peace-building efforts have had moderate success so far. Far too often hostilities flair up again after a peace agreement has been signed. Far too often fragile states end up collapsing.

The international community must therefore be more systematic, more strategic, more persevering and more reliable. It must intensify and target its efforts in order to make them as effective as possible.

Lasting and sustainable peace must be based on trust between the parties and reconciliation among the people.

Lasting and sustainable peace requires adequate security, a reasonable distribution of goods and burdens, and the opportunity for people to take part in political processes.

Lasting and sustainable peace depends on the existence of legitimate national authorities.

Therefore the promotion of good governance and the establishment of sound institutions are key dimensions of building peace and basic freedoms.

- - - - -

Norway has been – and is – involved in a number of peace processes and negotiations. Our participation takes different forms:

• It ranges from official facilitator of negotiations – as in Sri Lanka and the Philippines,
• to sponsoring a back channel for secret negotiations – as was the case a decade ago in the Middle East,
• to being an actor in an international coalition – as in Sudan and also in Ethiopia-Eritrea, Somalia, Colombia and Guatemala.

In Sri Lanka, Norway has been facilitating the peace process between the Government and the Tamil Tigers for the past five years.

Substantial progress has been made in this peace process since 2002, when the Government and the LTTE entered into a cease-fire agreement. Three years of cease-fire is by far the longest period of cessation of hostilities since the war began in 1983. It has probably saved thousands of lives.

Maintaining the cease-fire is one of the keys to success. Therefore an independent monitoring mission has been set up to monitor the cease-fire, headed by Norway and including observers from the five Nordic countries.

The Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission also functions as a kind of facilitator on the ground by assisting the parties in solving problems before they escalate. As with the peace process, implementation of the cease-fire agreement is the responsibility of the parties themselves.

The role of the monitoring mission is to assist, not to enforce.

Today, direct negotiations between the parties have been suspended. The uncertain political and security situation, and the parties’ need to develop confidence in one another as negotiating partners, have contributed to the delay in resuming talks.

The post-tsunami situation has created an opportunity for implementing confidence-building measures, through the ongoing work of establishing a joint mechanism for channelling funds for rebuilding the tsunami-affected areas in the north and east.

We hope an agreement on a joint mechanism will be reached shortly. The successful implementation of such a mechanism would not only ensure the equitable distribution of relief based on real needs and local priorities, but would contribute greatly to creating a favourable climate for peace talks in the longer term.

I am prepared to continue working closely with the parties to facilitate a return to the negotiating table. In this process it is particularly important to keep the channels of communication open.

Peace facilitation is always a painstaking process that requires patience. Real, homegrown peace takes time to establish.

We are prepared for this – and we remain committed to assisting as a patient partner in Sri Lanka for as long as the parties wish us to do so. It is they who are responsible for moving the process forward.

Turning to the situation in the Middle East, twelve years ago, after months of secret back channel talks, mutual recognition was achieved between Israel and the PLO and the Oslo Agreement was signed in 1993. The situation in the Middle East has been through many phases since the Declaration of Principles was signed in 1993.

I visited Israel and the Palestinian Territory two weeks ago and was encouraged by the mutual commitment to getting the process back on track. I hope this will lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state living peacefully side by side with Israel.

The Road Map contains all the steps that are necessary to achieve the two-state solution. From our point of view, we should now look towards final status negotiations.

Prime Minister Sharon’s plan for disengagement from the settlements in Gaza and four settlements on the West Bank could be a major step towards the two-state solution.

The international community must be resolute in insisting that the withdrawal is carried out in accordance with the Road Map and Security Council resolutions and co-ordinated with the Palestinian Authority. Only a concerted, targeted effort on the part of the Quartet can give the further process the necessary momentum and legitimacy.

A “Gaza first and Gaza last – solution” will never bring peace to the Middle East.

In my meetings with Israeli and Palestinian ministers two weeks ago I emphasised that any use of violence would have a devastating effect in the current fragile situation. I urged the Palestinians to do their utmost to combat terrorism and improve the security situation. – And I urged the Israelis to allow the Palestinian Authority time to do their job with regard to the security situation and stressed that the Israeli Defence Forces must exercise military restraint.

It is important that the Palestinian people see tangible improvements in their everyday lives. The international community will contribute to these efforts. Norway is among the major donors to the Palestinians. As chair of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee, I have personally been involved in mobilising support from other donors to the World Bank trust fund for budgetary support to the Palestinian Authority.

However, no amount of aid will be sufficient to bring about economic revival as long as the Israeli closure regime remains in force. Israel must lift the closures and other obstacles to the free flow of people and goods.

While most attention recently has been directed at the disengagement plan and Gaza, developments in the West Bank and East Jerusalem continue to cause great concern. The construction of the wall on occupied Palestinian land and the expansion of settlements violate international law and could jeopardise the two-state solution.

Despite the current optimism, the situation is still fragile and could easily be reversed. The international community should help the parties develop a relationship that is sufficiently robust to withstand the negative events that are bound to occur.

Moving to another long-lasting internal conflict, the one in Sudan, the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement by the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) in Nairobi on 9 January was an historic event. The neighbouring nations have through their regional organisation IGAD made a significant effort to bring this tragic war to an end. Norway, together with the US, UK and Italy, is proud to have been supporting the parties and IGAD in this effort.

The agreement marks the end of the conflict between the South and the North in Sudan. However, the serious situation in Darfur is still a matter of grave concern.

We are faced with three types of challenges in Sudan now:

• The first is making the Comprehensive Peace Agreement truly national. Other political parties in Sudan and other areas must be included.
• The second is implementing the peace agreement. This will require far-reaching reforms, both nationally and in the south.
• And the third is co-ordination and harmonisation of the international support for the implementation of the peace agreement.

The challenge to the parties in Sudan, and to the international community, is now to make the peace agreement work. It will be of utmost importance to show the Sudanese people that the international community stands ready to assist in bringing this war-ridden country back to a normal stage. We will host the first international donor conference for Sudan in Oslo in two weeks time. Wide support to Sudan must be secured in order to sustain peace and development for the whole of the country in the years to come.

As Chinese interest for Sudan has grown considerably over the last years. We are happy to be informed that China will be represented at the Oslo conference by their ambassador. I appreciate the Chinese show of will for participating in the UN mission in Sudan.

I would also like to say a few words about Haiti.

The current situation in Haiti is fragile. The country needs a long-term, well co-ordinated international commitment. The MINUSTAH mission, led by Brazil, is playing a key role in the restoration of security and preparation for fair and transparent elections. I am happy to note that China has sent a 125-member police detachment to Haiti to serve with MINUSTAH.

Apart from restoring security and preparing for the upcoming elections, obvious priorities right now are making sure that investment and aid are translated into projects and jobs. But Haiti also needs to develop a political climate and culture of dialogue, tolerance and respect.

Over the last three years Norway has – in co-operation with local partners – been supporting and encouraging national reconciliation in the country. We are helping to create space and venues for political interchange, dialogue and consensus building in an open and inclusive process.

Norway intends to continue its commitment to Haiti, particularly as regards promoting reconciliation among political and civilian groups.

Norway remains concerned about the lack of democratic progress in Burma. We are working through the UN and other channels to support the democratic forces in the country. Aung San Suu Kyi and the proponents of democracy must be allowed to participate in the political process.

Norway has been supporting the Burmese exile community for many years and has helped to strengthen civil society in Burma. We are also encouraging other countries in the region to use the channels available to them to promote political reforms in Burma.

Last year Norway was invited to participate in the Bangkok process on Burma. We have experienced that neither the sanctions approach nor the policy of engagement has led to changes in the regime’s policies.

We must therefore continually assess what means are most suitable for supporting democratisation in the country. Measures to promote dialogue will be essential in this connection.

- - - - -

People sometimes ask me how it is that Norway has come to play a role in peace and reconciliation processes.

• Generally speaking, our efforts are always part of a broader setting: Norway’s role as a peace facilitator is a continuation of our long-standing support for the UN mandate for peace and security, and of our tradition of humanitarian action and development co-operation.
• We more often support other leading actors than serve as leading actor ourselves. But in certain cases – often through personal connections or even by chance – Norway does take a leading role. This always happens at the request of the parties to the conflict.
• Furthermore, Norway is a patient facilitator. There is broad political consensus in Norway on our policy of promoting peace and reconciliation. One example is our engagement in Sri Lanka, which has been maintained over time by three different ministers of foreign affairs – from three different parties. This in turn ensures consistency; we are able to keep up our commitment regardless of changing governments or political currents. We remain engaged – even at difficult stages in a peace process.
• The broad domestic political backing for our policy in this field also means that there are resources available for peace and reconciliation processes. We are able to use these financial and human resources in a flexible way. This also enables us to become engaged quickly.
• Another important factor is the emphasis we give to our co-operation with national and international NGOs. Norwegian NGOs have gained valuable experience through their activities in different parts of the world over several decades. And perhaps even more importantly, their idealistic approach has earned them a reputation as highly professional teams of experts dedicated to helping others. Therefore we have good networks and hands-on knowledge of the various regions – and we have been able to draw on the skills and expertise of these organisations.
• A common denominator of many of the peace processes in which we have been involved has been the interplay between diplomatic and humanitarian assistance, and between government and non-state actors. This is a recipe that has proved to be quite successful.

• We are also regarded in many quarters as impartial. Norway has no colonial past, and we are generally perceived as not having a hidden political or economic agenda.
• Because we cannot succeed on our own, we work together with other international actors, both to ensure the necessary support for the processes we are involved in, and to be able to draw on resources we do not have ourselves.
• Finally, an important aspect of our involvement is that we are peace-helpers – not peacemakers. As a facilitator, we try to play our part in supporting the parties, but at the end of the day the will to peace must come from the parties themselves.

These factors go a long way in explaining how Norway is able to play such a role. As regards why we choose to do so, the main answer is that, like many others, we feel we have a moral obligation to contribute to the peaceful resolution of conflicts around the world.

But we are not driven by pure altruism. Although we are located far to the north – in a peaceful corner – contributing to peace in other parts of the world is also in our own interests.

- - - - -

The multilateral organisations have crucial roles to play in all of this. Developments over the past decades have shown that common challenges require common solutions.

For Norway, the United Nations is the primary forum for promoting global peace and development. It is essential that the quest for peace and security is pursued within a strong framework of international law, the UN Charter and Security Council resolutions.

Indeed, the main purpose of the United Nations, as set out in Article 1 of the Charter, is “to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace”.

The goal of the founders of the UN was to safeguard future generations from the scourge of war, reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights and the dignity of the human being, and establish conditions under which justice and respect for international law can be maintained.

This is still our goal today. Our objective is to modernise and reform the United Nations so that it is an effective vehicle for attaining this goal. We therefore welcome the recommendations by the UN Secretary General, based on the High Level Panel’s report, as essential contributions to strengthen the UN’s relevance and efficiency.

There is a manifest need for reform. The authority of the Security Council is being challenged. The General Assembly has lost some of its vitality. There are major gaps in the way UN institutions are addressing the needs of countries that are under stress and risk sliding towards state collapse.

The UN Summit this September will be of critical importance. It provides us with a unique opportunity to strengthen our collective capacity to address the security situation of today, and to take decisive steps towards the implementation of the Millennium Declaration, including the Millennium Development Goals.

We realise that many developing countries are suspicious about what they perceive as a tendency of donors to focus more on their own security than on the needs of developing countries. We feel, however, that this concern cuts both ways. We must be aware that the security situation of today is multifaceted, and without the mutual recognition of threats there can be no collective security.

Strengthening the rule of law is key to both security and development. It is an important prerequisite for creating conditions for sustained economic growth and an essential factor in efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. The rule of law is also fundamental in conflict prevention and post-conflict peace building.

The goal of development is to give all human beings a life of dignity.

Development means empowering each and every individual, ensuring each person’s ability to participate in political decision-making as well as their right to voice dissent.

Our goal is to create freedom from fear and want, not just for states, but for all the people who live in them as well. Eleven years after the disaster in Rwanda we cannot shy away from addressing the responsibility to protect.

The Security Council in particular has the responsibility to act with authority, efficiency, and without hesitation in situations of mass atrocity. The Security Council is fully empowered under the Charter to address the full range of security threats with which States are concerned. The responsibility to protect must be preceded by a responsibility to prevent.

Clearly, we need to build greater consensus around the need for collective action and early diplomatic response, which can prevent the need for military intervention.

We need a Security Council reform that increases the effectiveness and the legitimacy of the Council, and enhances its capacity and willingness to act in the face of threats.

We need international agreement on a more consistent and coherent approach to peace building, which focuses on creating the key institutions, functions and capacities of a well-functioning state.

In a global economy, on a global political scene with regard to stability, peace and prosperity, and in a world where we all share the same environmental resources, both Norway and China depend on close international co-operation and clear rules to succeed. Norway wants China as a partner in making the UN and other multilateral frameworks strong, efficient and useful to all members.

- - - - -

This year, we are marking Norway’s 100 ^th> anniversary as an independent nation, following the peaceful dissolution of the Swedish-Norwegian Union in 1905.

In commemoration of this event, a centennial programme has been launched in key partner countries with the aim of presenting a contemporary, multi-faceted view of Norway and Norway’s international relations.

More specifically, the centennial programme is focusing on Norway as:

• a partner in peace and development
• a nation rich in natural resources, and
• a modern, culturally diversified and innovative knowledge-based society.

In China we will have a number of cultural and academic events, as well as a joint Chinese, Swedish and Norwegian seminar on civil society and public sector reform, drawing upon our Nordic experiences.

When taking stock of Norway’s first 100 years as a sovereign state, it is not our independence as such that emerges as the dominant feature. 2005 also marks 100 years of close ties with key partner countries and of Norway’s independent participation in the international community. Co-operation, the belief in common solutions, interdependence – these are the hallmarks of our relations with the rest of the world.

In this perspective, I am very encouraged by the way Norwegian-Chinese relations are developing. Our aim is to further expand our broad and active co-operation with China.

We propose more research and institutional co-operation, as well as efforts to increase both countries’ knowledge of the other’s arts, culture, society and businesses. Human rights and environmental co-operation will continue to occupy a central place.

I am sure you will agree that there is wide scope for further contact and closer relations between Norway and China. Our many differences can indeed become our strengths as we share our experience and our expertise, as we widen our understanding of the world we live in. We are ready and we are willing to proceed along this path – in our bilateral relations and in our contribution towards peace, security and development in all parts of the world.

[Thank you. I welcome the questions or comments you may have].