Foreign Minister Bjørn Tore Godal's Statement to the Storting on Foreign Policy, 30 January 1997

Foreign Minister Bjørn Tore Godal's Statement to the Storting on Foreign Policy, 30 January 1997

Mr. President,

The protracted demonstrations in Belgrade, Sofia and Seoul are each in their own way a testimony to the powerful impact of politics on the lives of individuals. As fellow human beings, we too are affected by the situation of the Serbs, the Bulgarians and the Koreans. Their struggle for fundamental rights calls for commitment on our part that transcends national borders, motivated by our desire to help others and by the need to safeguard our own interests in the broadest sense of the word.

Norway's main task in the field of foreign and security policy is to contribute to peace and security and to sustainable and democratic development in the areas adjacent to our borders and on a global scale. We need safe, predictable surroundings if we are to build up Norwegian society. Without this security it will be more difficult to achieve lasting value creation that promotes employment, a dynamic industrial sector, and welfare for ourselves and future generations.

The Government therefore attaches decisive importance to broad international involvement as a means of satisfying our security needs in the widest sense of the term. The risk of a major war breaking out on our continent has been substantially reduced. However, regional conflicts, ethnic and social tension, economic problems and environmental degradation may threaten the security and stability that are a condition for lasting peace. European security must be based on interaction between different organizations with instruments that reinforce and supplement each other in relation to security, human rights and democracy, and economic and social development.

For almost 50 years, NATO membership has provided a firm fundament in an insecure world. The recent fundamental changes in our foreign policy surroundings have also given NATO cooperation new dimensions. The new NATO as it will be confirmed at the Madrid Summit in on 8-9 July will ensure that the organization remains a cornerstone of the European security architecture.

As a collective defence organization and political link between Europe and North America, NATO has occupied a unique position in security policy cooperation. By continuing the extensive political and military renewal and adaptation that have been going on since the upheavals in Eastern Europe began, NATO will be carrying on this role. Of course this development must be based on the assumption that the Alliance must have a strong military backbone. But preserving NATO's traditional core functions will not be enough. New tasks have emerged and must be solved. The Madrid Summit will be focusing on all aspects of NATO's development, ranging from enlargement and internal restructuring to relations with the partner countries and with Russia. All of these things are bound up with one another.

NATO's new role in the implementation of peacekeeping operations for the UN and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe has intensified the need to adapt NATO's military organization. This is being done among other things with the help of the Combined Joint Task Forces. These forces are part of NATO's permanent command structure, and they are trained and prepared for peace support operations. They can be rapidly identified and deployed wherever they are needed, if necessary together with forces from non-NATO countries. In many ways the operation in Bosnia is the first of such operations and shows all those who might wonder about this what the new NATO will mean in practice.

The Combined Joint Task Forces concept is a crucial element in the Alliance's ability to carry out new tasks. It is also essential in terms of the military resources the allies can decide to put at the disposal of the Western European Union (WEU) for "European operations", i.e. in situations where our North American allies do not participate. By allowing the WEU to draw on NATO resources, we avoid the build-up of parallel military structures in Europe. At the same time, the CJTF concept will allow NATO to involve Russia and other partner countries in peace support operations, as we have seen in Bosnia.

At the foreign ministers' meeting in Berlin last June, it was decided that the European Security and Defence Identity was to be developed within the Alliance. It is natural for Europe to take a larger share of the responsibility in the new situation, and not least the USA expects us to do so. The Berlin decision implies that we avoid undesirable competition between NATO and the WEU. NATO continues to be the main instrument. The Government considers it very important that this process does not weaken the trans-Atlantic ties. Trans-Atlantic solidarity will continue to be as essential as it has always been.

Military crisis management under the auspices of the WEU will in most cases draw on NATO's resources. Decisions on such operations should therefore be taken in such a way as to ensure the participation and support of all NATO members, not least the USA. The Government considers it important that Norway, as an associate member of the WEU, should have a full say in situations where the WEU draws on resources provided by NATO. In our view, the idea being advocated by some countries at the EU Intergovernmental Conference, that the EU should be able on its own to instruct the WEU on measures for crisis management, conflict prevention and peacekeeping that involve the resources of NATO and third countries, is not viable. Nor do we feel that decisions in the EU on the military aspects of crisis management will necessarily strengthen the overall European capability in this area.

In the adaptation of NATO's military structure, the fact that the number of members of the Alliance will increase in the coming years must be taken into account. The Government supports NATO enlargement because it regards this as a further step towards a security system that will encompass the whole of Europe. At the NATO Summit some Central and Eastern European countries will be invited to initiate membership negotiations, which, hopefully, will result in an enlargement when NATO celebrates its 50th anniversary in 1999. However, it is crucial that enlargement does not create new dividing lines. Therefore, we consider relations with the countries that do not become members in this round to be of great importance. We are making efforts to ensure that it will be made clear at the Madrid Summit that NATO will continue to remain open to new members after the first stage of enlargement.

NATO's initial contribution to the integration of countries that have not joined will be to strengthen the Partnership for Peace. The partner countries should be drawn more actively into a PfP cooperation that more clearly reflects their needs and priorities. There should be more leeway for regional cooperation activities in which the larger NATO member countries also take part. These activities must be closely linked with the broader cooperation structures.

The PfP should also be given a clearer political profile. This can be done by making new arrangements for political consultations. At NATO's ministerial meeting in December it was decided to keep working on the proposal to set up an Atlantic Partnership Council. A council like this will be able to provide a cohesive framework for the now very extensive PfP cooperation and improve the possibility for the partner countries to be involved in shaping cooperation with NATO. It will also be able to take over the role and functions of the North Atlantic Cooperation Council (NACC).

The work of strengthening the PfP and the plans for the proposed Atlantic Partnership Council will be completed by the Summit. The new PfP will involve considerably closer security policy collaboration between the Allies and the partner countries, incorporating the latter more closely into the Euro-Atlantic security policy cooperation. It is important to view this process in connection with the enlargement process.

In the process of adapting the organization to the new security policy situation, NATO's relationship with Russia must be given the same weight as the other elements. Russia's legitimate security policy interests must be taken into account. We will not achieve lasting peace and stability in Europe without active Russian participation. Russia's size and significance make it NATO's most important cooperation partner. Our goal must be to create a genuine partnership between NATO and Russia, so as to involve the latter in the strengthening of European security.

The Government advocates that relations between NATO and Russia should be formalized in a political document, which would contain the principles of cooperation and guidelines for its practical implementation, as well as establishing a permanent consultative council. Such a body would have to give Russia more than just an opportunity to state its views, but without allowing the Russians a right of veto over Alliance matters, including enlargement issues. The Government is making efforts to ensure that the cooperation document is ready in time for the Summit, at the latest. This will show that relations between NATO and Russia are one of the mainstays of the new Europe.

Russia has been uneasy about whether NATO enlargement will involve the arming of new member countries and the deployment of nuclear weapons on the territory of new members. There are no grounds for such unease. At the NATO foreign ministers' meeting last month it was clearly stated that there would be no such deployment now, nor was it foreseen in the future.

NATO must take care that new arrangements do not create different categories of members. New members must have all rights and all obligations. Anything else would weaken the cohesion of the Alliance. But new members will, like Norway, be able to impose restrictions on military activities on their territory, provided that these restrictions are self-imposed and freely chosen.

Another important step in the broad approach to security challenges is the OSCE's confirmation at its summit in Lisbon last month of its own significant role in the future security order in Europe. Through its special representatives and international missions it plays an important conflict-preventing role in many areas. It also plays a key role in the re-building of societies after conflicts and hostilities, e.g. in the conducting of elections. The Government considers it important that the efforts to strengthen the OSCE should continue. Norway has offered to take over the OSCE chairmanship in 1999.

Economic progress and social stability are crucial for lasting security in Central and Eastern Europe. These countries regard EU membership as being essential to their efforts to secure better living conditions. EU enlargement has definite security policy aspects. Negotiations with the applicant countries are expected to begin when the Intergovernmental Conference ends, which according to schedule will be this summer. No applicant country should be excluded from these negotiations. The Government has given its full support to the Nordic EU countries that are advocating that the Baltic countries should also be included in the invitation to negotiate. Early membership for these countries would mean a great deal for stable development in the Baltic Sea area, which is also a goal shared by the Nordic countries' "5 + 3" cooperation with the Baltic countries.

Interest in the Baltic Sea Cooperation has recently increased. One of the most important aspects of this cooperation is that it will improve relations between Russia and the Baltic countries and link all these countries more closely with European cooperation arrangements. Norway is helping to strengthen the integration processes being created through the Baltic Sea Cooperation.

The Baltic Sea Cooperation and the Barents Cooperation each contribute in their own way to the pan-European dialogue. The Government regards these cooperation arrangements as mutually supplementary and reinforcing, not as rivals. This regional cooperation promotes stability and security in the areas adjacent to our borders. While we should do our best to see that European efforts in the Barents and Baltic Sea regions are viewed in context, it is clear that we ourselves will give priority in the Barents Cooperation. For instance, under the Action Programme for Eastern Europe, NOK 13 million has been earmarked for the building of a Russian customs post at Storskog.

The Government is pleased to note that the Barents Cooperation has made a place for itself in the European political arena. With its strong emphasis on local and regional initiatives and on cross-border decision-making and activities, this was in many ways an innovation in international politics, which is being studied with interest by many others. The prospects of involving the EU more closely will improve under the Swedish chairmanship. We attach importance to having the EU and the EU countries as active partners, especially in the important environmental and nuclear safety efforts in the areas adjacent to our borders.

The problem of nuclear safety in northwestern Russia represents a major foreign policy challenge. I was very pleased to note the lively, wide-ranging debate that followed my statement on this topic to the Storting last October. This is a question of ensuring our safety in relation to our immediate surroundings. The close Norwegian-Russian cooperation on nuclear safety issues has had a positive dynamic effect that has stimulated international interest and involvement, especially in the USA, the EU and a number of EU member countries. The Government will continue to work in a way that is purposeful, that promotes practical solutions to specific problems, and that encourages Russian initiatives and international participation.

A revised and updated Plan of Action for Nuclear Matters is expected to be ready for publication in a few weeks. I would like to mention that the funding for the Lepse project seems to have been secured through a collaboration between Norway, France, the European Commission and the Nordic Environment Finance Corporation (NEFCO). The Government also intends to complete the negotiations on the agreement on cooperation on projects dealing with the environmental aspects of the dismantling of decommissioned Russian nuclear submarines as soon as possible. Contact will be maintained with the respective bodies of the Storting concerning this important work.

Norway currently has the chairmanship of the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS), in which all the Arctic states are cooperating on the protection of the Arctic environment against pollution and environmental disasters, protection of the Arctic flora and fauna, and sustainable development in this vulnerable area. This cooperation has resulted in greater knowledge and awareness of the Arctic, and has contributed in a number of important ways to preventing environmental degradation in the area. A comprehensive status report on pollution in the Arctic will be presented at the next AEPS ministerial meeting, which will be held in Tromsø this summer.

The Arctic Council was established last September, after many years of negotiations. This is a meeting place where the Arctic states and representatives of the indigenous peoples come together to promote sustainable development in the region in the environmental, economic and cultural fields. Norway is especially interested in ensuring that Sami culture has a viable basis.

Like environmental issues, resource management is a central element of our cooperation with the areas adjacent to our borders. The issue in question here is the safeguarding of our livelihood. As a major fishing nation, Norway has a special responsibility for promoting the sustainable use of living marine resources. International law, with its increased emphasis on the rights of coastal states, has given us new instruments for ensuring the sound management of fishery resources. The successful conclusion of an agreement between the Faeroe Islands, Iceland, Norway, Russia and the EU on the management of Norwegian spring-spawning herring in 1997 bodes well for future cooperation in this area. The agreement regulates fisheries in the entire distribution range of the stocks, including the Atlantic Donut Hole, which is in international waters.

The extensive fishing outside quota arrangements in the Loophole has been going on for several years and is a constant source of concern. In cooperation with Russia, the Government has persistently tried to conclude an agreement with Iceland, which is by far the most active in these fisheries. Although the negotiations have been very difficult, the Government has not given up hope of arriving at an agreement that will put a stop to fishing outside quota arrangements. I note with interest that the director of Iceland's marine research institute strongly advocated recently that all such fisheries should be stopped in the Loophole.

The Government also gives high priority to the efforts to find a solution to the question of Russian-Norwegian delimitation of the continental shelf and the economic zones in the Barents Sea. This has important implications for both fish and petroleum resources.

Norway's role as a major energy exporter is becoming increasingly important in a foreign policy perspective. We are responsible, among other things, for the management of large gas reserves. These resources may make it possible for more countries, including our Nordic neighbours and countries in other parts of the Baltic Sea region, to focus even more on a sustainable energy system. Several countries in the area are making active efforts to meet their future energy needs. Increased use of natural gas can help to reduce total emissions and limit the use of nuclear energy.

Issues related to the adjacent areas are an important part of Nordic cooperation. The Norwegian chairmanship of the Nordic Council of Ministers provides us with a good opportunity to influence the agenda and a special responsibility for making sure that Nordic cooperation is meaningful to all the Nordic countries. I would like to mention briefly four priority areas that are particularly important for Nordic foreign policy cooperation: EU and EEA issues, protection of human rights, joint contribution of forces to peace support operations, and collaboration in international organizations.

Although the Government is, as you know, working on a wide range of issues connected with the EU through bilateral contacts with EU member states and with the European Commission, and within the framework of the EEA Agreement, the Nordic channel to the EU is also very important for Norway. We will continue to attach great importance to Nordic consultations on matters which are being discussed by the Intergovernmental Conference and which are also of great importance to Norway. For example, EU cooperation to combat crime and drug trafficking and on asylum, immigration and visa policies is of particular interest to Norway and the other Nordic countries in view of our participation in the Schengen Cooperation. Future enlargement of the EU will also greatly affect Norway and Iceland, which form part of the internal market by virtue of their membership of the EEA. The Government will discuss the issues associated with the establishment of the Economic and Monetary Union in the Revised National Budget this spring.

The Government has also advocated some form of "early warning" for upcoming EU/EEA matters. During the process of clarifying the Norwegian position on proposals from the Commission that are relevant to the EEA Agreement, we will use the Nordic channels to identify common Nordic interests at the earliest possible stage and prevent unnecessary conflicts with other Nordic countries. This could make it easier to gain acceptance for common Nordic interests in Brussels, but we do not of course expect support from the other Nordic countries on issues where national interests do not coincide.

Here I would like to note that cooperation within the framework of the EEA is generally functioning satisfactorily. The structural framework remains, but the EFTA pillar has less influence within the EEA now that Sweden, Finland and Austria have joined the EU. Norway now has a larger share of the responsibility for ensuring that the agreement functions as intended. With a weakened EFTA pillar, we are in a more vulnerable position when conflicts of interest arise.

The Nordic countries have a long tradition of working together for democracy and human rights. In all the Nordic countries, the general public is very sensitive to these issues and is genuinely concerned about them. In this context, I would particularly like to mention the human rights situation in Turkey; here, it is of the utmost importance that Turkey's partners in the Council of Europe, not least the Nordic countries, join forces in urging reforms. As regards other human rights issues, I would like to refer you to the broad debate in the Storting last autumn which followed the three ministers' statements on this subject.

The Government has made proposals to the other Nordic countries as to how we can strengthen Nordic cooperation on peace support operations. This is a field where we have much to contribute, and where the Nordic countries can complement each other in a positive way. We wish to base our efforts on the existing UN stand-by forces in the Nordic countries. The objective is to enable the Nordic countries to strengthen their assistance to the international community in terms of military units and other types of peace-building resources. High standards of coordination of the military, humanitarian and civilian aspects of such operations are generally required today.

Last year, work was begun on what is known as the NORDCAPS project, under which the Nordic countries are to earmark various units which can be combined to form a joint Nordic peace force whose size and function will vary according to need. It will be based on present and future stand-by forces and will involve a maximum of 4,000 - 5,000 troops.

One of our priorities is to continue Nordic consultations and maintain a Nordic profile in international organizations. Although our experience during the past few years has been somewhat mixed, on the whole it has been positive. Informal Nordic consultations and contacts are continuing in international organizations, but adapted to new circumstances. In practice, a common Nordic stance is often reached by Norway and Iceland endorsing EU statements and declarations. We will continue this practice, which does not prevent us from presenting our own opinions and promoting our own priorities. It is furthermore encouraging that the EU often adopts Nordic views, thus giving them more weight.

More than anything else, it is Nordic cooperation within the UN that has created the Nordic profile in international politics. Our strong commitment to the UN is part of our efforts to create a better and safer world, which will also serve to meet our own needs. The UN will continue to be one of the cornerstones of Norwegian foreign policy. Reforms and more efficient ways of organizing UN activities have been high on the agenda in recent years, andrightly so. We look forward to seeing the new Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, put into practice his clearly expressed willingness to carry out reforms.

The UN's role in promoting peace and security needs to be strengthened. The Security Council should be expanded to take account of the changes that have taken place since the UN Charter was adopted. Making the Security Council more representative of the organization as a whole would increase its legitimacy and thus improve its ability to play an active role in preventing war and in resolving conflicts. In close cooperation with the other Nordic countries, Norway has taken an active part in discussions and has submitted proposals for reforming the Security Council. We are determined to continue this work. The Government has proposed Norway as a candidate for membership of the Security Council in 2001-2002.

The Government has taken a number of initiatives designed to strengthen the UN's role in peace-keeping, security-building and conflict management. The Norwegian proposal to establish a trust fund within the UN for preventive action has been well received so far. Several countries are prepared to contribute funds. Together with other countries, we have also proposed ways of improving the UN's ability to respond rapidly in a crisis. Norway has contributed actively to the establishment of a new Rapidly Deployable Mission Headquarters which could be used for immediate deployment in efforts related to conflict areas. We are seeking ways of improving the overall planning of UN operations in crisis areas. In connection with the implementation of the Secretary-General's Agenda for Peace, Norway is heading a working group which is dealing with the coordination of political, humanitarian, military and economic measures. This process will be an important item on the agenda of the UN this year.

Differences of opinion between North and South are hampering efforts to reform the UN and are the main reason why the process is moving so slowly, particularly in the economic and social fields. Many developing countries are concerned that any reforms will affect them negatively and tend to weaken the UN instead of strengthening it. These concerns must be taken seriously. Our strong commitment to the UN and the substantial funds we contribute should put Norway and the Nordic countries in a good position to help to build up trust between North and South.

Throughout 1996, the Nordic countries cooperated closely on proposals which would help to revitalize UN efforts in the economic and social fields. At the same time, there have been extensive consultations, primarily with countries in the South. Our experience of these consultations has been very encouraging, both with regard to gaining acceptance for Nordic proposals and building up mutual trust.

The main objective of the Nordic proposals for reform, which were developed through the Nordic project, is to improve the effect of the UN's work at national level by, for instance, appointing a joint representative to be responsible for all development assistance provided by UN organizations in any one country. This, in turn, requires closer consolidation of the central UN administration, and we have proposed greater harmonization and integration of UN development assistance activities at headquarters level. We have also proposed that the General Assembly strengthens its role as designer of general UN policy in the economic and social fields, and that the ECOSOC concentrates on drawing up strategies for the implementation of UN decisions. More details on the Nordic proposals for reform will be included in the Report to the Storting due to be presented in April. The Government will also continue to participate in the efforts to improve the organization of UN activities in the field of human rights, a field in which there is still a great deal to be done.

A central element in a longer-term development perspective is of course global trade policy. Our involvement in the World Trade Organization naturally has a significant influence on our own outward-oriented economy. As a small country with extensive foreign trade but which is not part of any trade bloc, Norway is dependent on an efficient, rule-based trading system. The Government therefore places great emphasis on strengthening the multilateral trading system to promote trade liberalization. There is no doubt that this system has been strengthened by the undertakings made at the Singapore Conference last month to complete unfinished negotiations and start work in new trade-related areas. The current dynamism of the WTO gives reason to expect a new, comprehensive round of negotiations around the turn of the millennium. Early next year, the GATT/ WTO is due to celebrate its 50th anniversary. In connection with this, the modus operandi and organization of the WTO will be examined more closely.

The Singapore ministerial conference and the conclusions reached there reflect the increasing globalization of the world economy. An example in point is the declaration adopted by a number of countries on elimination of tariffs on information technology products by the year 2000. When it is implemented, the declaration will apply to 90 per cent of global trade in computer technology and telecommunications equipment. It is important for the Norwegian information technology industry, an industry which is experiencing rapid growth, exports 80-90 per cent of its production, consists of many small and medium-sized businesses and which creates jobs in outlying districts. As soon as the negotiations have been concluded, the Government will submit a proposal to the Storting on the elimination of tariffs on IT products.

An encouraging feature of the globalization of the world economy is that an increasing number of countries are benefiting from the advantages of international trade. A major challenge for the WTO lies in helping the poorest countries to benefit more from the multilateral trading system. A Plan of Action with this objective was adopted at the Singapore Conference. Norway has been in the forefront in providing market access for products from the least-developed countries (LDCs), and has helped to put the WTO in a better position to meet the needs of these countries for technical assistance. The Government will seek to ensure that the WTO's Plan of Action is followed up by specific measures to provide market access and improve coordination between national and multilateral organizations, so that the least-developed countries are able to take an active part in the global trading system.

The Government is seeking to speed up the membership negotiations for Russia and China as well as the other 28 applicants. Several of these countries will be important trade and investment markets for Norway. Norwegian business and industry have unfortunately found that trade regimes in a number of applicant countries are complicated and unpredictable, an experience shared for instance by firms in North Norway that have invested in northwestern Russia. These problems are being discussed during membership negotiations with the WTO.

Norway has played an active role in promoting an interest within the WTO in the links between trade and other issues of importance to our societies. Work on the links between trade and environmental protection has been in progress for several years, revealing the complexity of this issue. This is an area in which Norwegian interests must be weighed against each other. Norway will continue to foster a common understanding of the problems. The dialogue with the developing countries is particularly important in this context.

For the first time in the history of GATT/WTO, labour standards have been mentioned in a ministerial declaration. Some of you might say that this was high time, but in any event it has happened. The member countries reiterated their commitment to respect internationally recognized core labour standards. However, trade and labour standards was the most controversial issue dealt with during the ministerial conference, and clear restrictions were set on how this work is to be continued. The developing countries in particular fear that the introduction of labour standards will be used for protectionist purposes, in order to keep their products out of world markets. One of Norway's aims in discussing the links between trade and labour standards was precisely to avoid the use of unilateral trade measures. The Government will continue to encourage a dialogue on these issues within the framework of the WTO, but will also seek to promote labour standards in all relevant fora, including in the context of development cooperation.

In the context of our overall foreign policy commitments, Norway's humanitarian efforts are occupying an increasingly prominent position. Indeed, they are an integral part of our foreign policy. Our efforts are based on an ethical obligation, which also enhances our own security. By promoting justice for and the welfare of the weakest groups of the world community, we will in the long term serve the cause of peace and enhance our own security, and at the same time strengthen Norway's international position.

Our humanitarian efforts are intended to help lay the foundations for a better future for people in recipient countries. They testify to the fact that security is no longer achieved solely by military means. We must find instruments that can target the situation of individual people and their problems, whether these are poverty, unemployment, threats to the environment or environmental degradation, or the constantly growing numbers of ethnic, social and religious conflicts. Our efforts to promote peace, human rights and democracy must form an integral part of our overall international efforts.

Norway allocated a total of about NOK 1.5 billion to humanitarian efforts in 1996, or about one sixth of the entire development cooperation budget. The plan is to maintain this level of involvement in 1997. In 1996, the main priority areas were the former Yugoslavia, central Africa, the Palestinian territories, Afghanistan and Sudan. We will continue our efforts in many of the same countries and regions in 1997 as well. And we know from experience that new crises may emerge in the course of the year.

There are some bright spots which should certainly be mentioned. In Guatemala, the final peace agreement was signed at the end of 1996. Norway's efforts to bring about peace and reconciliation, which started in 1990, and the long-term humanitarian activities of our NGOs were instrumental in making this possible. We shall continue to support the peace process in Guatemala, for instance by assisting in the demobilization of the guerrilla and defence forces.

A peace agreement has also been signed in the former Yugoslavia, but we have no guarantee of a lasting peace in this region either. It is imperative for the international community to play its part in providing conflict prevention measures and continued humanitarian assistance, as well as in re-establishing production and rebuilding the damaged infrastructure. Norway will give more support to independent media and human rights organizations. Our total involvement in the region will remain at a very high level; for example, more than 700 troops will be involved in the Stabilization Force, SFOR.

In the Middle East, we are pleased to note that the parties have finally reached an agreement on Israeli withdrawal from Hebron and a timetable for further withdrawal from the West Bank. This agreement must be implemented as soon as possible in accordance with the other agreements, so that trust can be restored between the parties. The Government will maintain Norway's involvement in the peace process. The fact that Norway was asked to lead the international observer corps in Hebron shows that we have the confidence of the parties. Today, important agreements related to Hebron will be signed here in Oslo.

1996 will be remembered for two particularly grave setbacks on the humanitarian front. The first was the new outbreak of the conflicts in the Great Lakes Region and the ensuing refugee crisis. Norway and other donor countries supplied substantial humanitarian resources to Rwanda and Zaire last autumn. The problems are still far from being solved. The violence in Rwanda and Burundi is escalating, and the situation in Zaire is extremely alarming. The region will undoubtedly have to be given high priority this year as well.

The second dramatic setback was the murder of six Red Cross aid workers, two of them Norwegian, in Chechnya just before Christmas. This atrocity has had a serious effect on all humanitarian efforts, and this appears to have been one of the aims of the perpetrators. We must show the world that international aid cannot be stopped by acts of terrorism. The principle that aid workers must have safe and secure access to civilians in distress is a fundamental one in international humanitarian law. This must be respected by everyone. At the same time, UN efforts to ensure the safety of aid workers in high-risk areas must be intensified. Those responsible for acts of terrorism against aid workers must be caught and punished.

Not all human disasters make the headlines, in the sense that they catch everyone's attention. There are still unresolved ethnic conflicts and unrest in the Caucasus. The same applies to the Central Asian republics, where vulnerable groups needed emergency relief towards the end of 1996. Northern Iraq and Sudan, too, are still close to civil war, and their need for help is correspondingly great. The Government cannot forget these "hidden" crisis areas, even if they are not given high priority by the media. In most of them, help can get through, either through the UN system or through NGOs.

Mr. President,

Our international commitment has become an increasingly important tool for creating security for the Norwegian people, because in a growing number of areas we are affected by what goes on outside our borders. And this trend will continue. Fifty years ago our greatest challenge was reconstruction after the war. During the 1960s the agenda was influenced by the entry of former colonies on the international scene as independent states. Ten years ago, everyone was deeply concerned about the fate of the Soviet Union as it faced critical decisions about its future. But no-one suspected at the time that the changes taking place in the Soviet Union and the Central and Eastern European countries would be so momentous.

We should of course be cautious in our predictions for the next decade because we have all been mistaken before. Nevertheless, I feel certain of one thing: the information and communication society will come to the fore in the years ahead. This will have political, economic and social consequences for our everyday lives. National borders will become less and less important. We are becoming closer to one another, but the gaps in terms of access to knowledge and technology may also grow wider. The need for international cooperation on joint solutions is increasing. This shows more than anything else that the traditional division between foreign and domestic policy is gradually being erased. We must acquire the in-depth knowledge and expertise we will need to deal with the challenges of the information and communication society. And we must do this in a way that will benefit our own society while at the same time helping to create a more just world. Since the potential for acquiring knowledge is evenly distributed among all humankind, this is a promising perspective as we approach a new millennium.