IFS-IDSA Conference on India’s grand strategic thought

Check against delivery.

The minister’s address was based on the following points:

 

Mr Sisiodia, Mr Tamnes,
Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

• Pleasure for me to open this seminar on “India’s Grand Strategic Thought”, arranged jointly by the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies (IFS) and the Indian Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA).
• Very relevant and timely. We are now strengthening our bilateral relationship with India, strengthening its “backbone”.
• A year ago, the Norwegian Government launched its Strategy for cooperation between India and Norway (we also have a China Strategy).
• An interesting thought: Would we have arranged such a seminar five or ten years ago?
• One of the priority areas for us is to build further on our many exchanges in research, higher education – as well as trade and culture.
• The event is another indication that Norwegian­Indian research collaboration is both gaining momentum and rapidly maturing.
• The cooperation programme between IFS and IDSA has already borne fruit:
• This is the second time I introduce an event arranged jointly by these two institutes. I had the great honour of visiting New Delhi earlier this year and opening a (almost similar) seminar on India’s security policy, with the Indian Minister of State Pallam Raju.
• Norwegian and Indian navy and coast guard officers (I am a “navy man” myself) exchanged experiences on maritime security and started a dialogue that I hope will prove valuable. As you know, Norway has the sixth largest merchant fleet in the world, and substantial parts of it sail in the Indian Ocean. The Indian Navy – one of the world’s largest – helps to keep the sea lines of communication safe. Norway and India both contribute to the fight against piracy off the coast of Somalia. I believe there is significant potential for expanding our cooperation on maritime transport and security. To mention just one area.

*****

General perspective: the horizon moving towards the East. I wrote a piece in a Norwegian newspaper in July on the “two horizons” – the one in East and the one in North.

• At first glance, any comparison between Norway and India seems marked by differences: in size, development, and regional and – at times – global outlook.
• But this perspective changes if we look more closely at our approaches to what is needed to combat poverty and build the necessary trust to improve global governance. These are areas where our interests converge.
• These are also challenges that we share – India and Norway, as well as the international community at large – and urgently need to address and constantly reassess to achieve our common goals.
• We live in a time of growing interdependence. The world is changing. This change is unprecedented in pace as well as in scope. Globalisation.
• Relations of power are shifting. We see a massive expansion in science and technology. Communication has been revolutionised.
• In short, we are witnessing a paradigm shift. The horizon is moving towards the East. Euroasia, Central Asia, the Far East – and India. The large horizon to the East.
• This affects the way we perceive strategy. Conventionally, strategy has been associated with the military and with war. We now face challenges of a different nature, other threats to security. We have to adjust our perspectives. Update our mental maps.
• Risk management is quite different from threat management. We need to expand our understanding of strategy, national interests and strategic priorities accordingly.
• The same applies to our pursuit of global common goods or strategic goals: improved global governance, a safer world, peace and reconciliation.
• We also need to find what I call new arenas, new methods and new partners in these endeavours.
• Increased economic and technological power in the East (China, India) will also lead to increased political power, a greater role. But how? And in what way? How will this affect us. We must allocate resources to analyses.

*****

Then, the “other horizon”, the horizon in the north, the High North. We are seeing:

• Climate change. Ice around the North Pole is receding, melting.
• This fact is shaping our strategic outlook. The High North is a strategic priority in our foreign and security policy. There are three aspects here – three “drivers” (of change):
• First, the melting of the polar ice is changing the character of the region by opening up new potential shipping routes. A Norwegian vessel is now on its way from Kirkenes (Syd-Varanger) to China.
• Second, and partly as a consequence of the first, the potential accessibility of natural resources – non-renewable ones like oil and gas, and renewable ones like fish. Norway meets 20% of the European continent’s gas demands. Sound management of fish stocks.
• And third, our neighbourly relations with Russia. A country in transition, changing. Where will it “land”? Delimitation line, to be signed 15 September in Murmansk.
• Svalbard, the northernmost part of Norway, situated close to the 80th parallel, offers a unique front row seat to observe both climate change and other major meteorological and atmospheric changes in the High North.
• Attracting increased international attention. India too is seizing this opportunity. In 2008 India opened the Himadri research station in Svalbard. Since then, activity at the station has been increasing, and new research scientists arrive at regular intervals. I sincerely welcome this development. Twice I have welcomed Indian ministers on their way to Svalbard. In India’s interests to have a presence there; you can study the weather in India from Svalbard.   
• Norway is a player in the High North, the Arctic, on the Northern horizon. The High North will come closer to us all.

*****

A few other issues: the United Nations and the future of global governance. Now the UNGA is coming up in two weeks.

• Issues of interest to both India and Norway. Again, our two countries differ in many respects, but we also see commonalities, such as per capita contributions to UN peacekeeping operations.
• Moreover, we are both engaged in the evolving discussions on the future of global governance, the role of the G20 group, the role of the UN itself.
• As a small state, Norway has a profound interest in a well-regulated world system - and relevant and effective international bodies that are both representative and legitimate.
• I firmly believe in the need to preserve the global arenas – first and foremost the UN. It is still a unique platform. But the UN has value precisely because it has convening power and can hold all nations accountable.
• Legitimacy is of the essence. The continued legitimacy of the UN Security Council will depend on our ability to push forward with reform. An effective Security Council must reflect today’s world.
• Therefore Norway supports India’s ambition of having a permanent seat on the UN Security Council.
• How can we best work multilaterally in this age of globalisation?
• The G20: The focus of much attention. Although the G20 is valuable and more representative than the G8 – and although we should salute some of the measures taken by the G20 to address the financial crisis – important questions remain to be resolved. The lack of legitimacy is but one. Efficiency vs. inclusiveness.
• Regarding the UN: An area of Norwegian-Indian security policy cooperation takes place in the framework of the UN. Both countries share a long-standing commitment to UN peacekeeping. When we met in Delhi in March, Foreign Minister Krishna and I agreed that we should make use of our joint experience in this field as a platform for closer cooperation. Now, this is already materialising. We can do more here. Today and tomorrow, bilateral discussions will be held on concrete cooperation on training peacekeepers. Our common goal is to strengthen the capacity of UN peacekeepers to protect civilians.
• There is a particular need for more training on how to protect civilians from conflict-related sexual violence. In my view, the profound insecurity perpetuated by sexual violence should be more explicitly addressed in our security and defence policies. Doctrines and training need to keep pace with such threats to human security.
• We are now in a process of strengthening gender relevant training for our military, police and civilian peacekeeping personnel, and we hope to benefit from active dialogue with India’s peacekeeping community in this endeavour.
• The MDGs 4 & 5, child and maternal health.

*****

On disarmament:

• Now, I have already mentioned some security policy issues. Another is our shared ambition to tackle the many challenges left on the road towards a world free of nuclear weapons. For me, the very notion of disarmament represents – more than anything – an opportunity to enhance security. Walking on a line between responsibility and realpolitik, we should acknowledge the legitimate concerns raised by the mere existence of nuclear weapons, as well as more immediate strategic considerations that make their elimination so difficult, in the view of others.
• And international humanitarian law has evolved dramatically since the end of World War II and the Cold War. We have banned two categories of weapons of mass destruction (biological and chemical weapons). We have also prohibited certain conventional weapons that cause unacceptable harm to civilians through the Mine Ban Convention and the Convention on Cluster Munitions. I urge India to sign these conventions.
• We must engage a much broader spectrum of society. To secure a sustained effort for nuclear disarmament, we must do two things. First, we need to reframe the nuclear issue to include all relevant aspects. Second, we need to take a fresh look at how multilateral negotiations are being conducted. The need to include all relevant state and non-state actors. The role of civil society and humanitarian organisations is essential.

• Now, every day more than 2 000 people die as a direct or indirect result of armed violence. A global problem that cuts across all levels of development. Armed violence:

• causes human rights violations,
• creates an atmosphere of fear and insecurity,
• fosters a culture of impunity,
• undermines trust in key public institutions,
• and splinters the social fabric of society.
• As I said, for me the very notion of disarmament represents ­ more than anything ­ an opportunity to enhance security.

*****

Finally, peace and reconciliation efforts, quiet diplomacy. Why engage?

• First. Because it is in our national interest: globalisation brings the impact of conflicts elsewhere in the world onto our doorsteps.
• Second. Because it is important: directly and indirectly, violent conflict kills millions of people. Moral obligation.
• Third. Because we care. Our humanitarian mandate.
• Fourth. Because we can: we have the experience, expertise, resources and networks to make a difference.
• Fifth. We must be aware of the complexities: as a government partner in various peace processes, we know from first-hand experience the painful trade-offs involved in policymaking in uncharted waters (including the dilemmas entailed in balancing ambitious human rights policies with the aspirations and demands of religious communities).
• And, finally, my sixth point. A comprehensive approach: as a government, we have the opportunity to speak to other governments; we can promote combinations of soft and hard approaches – including military means; we pull the financial plugs; and we can offer expertise, for example in natural resource and energy management in conflict zones.
• Middle East. Sri Lanka.

In conclusion

• To me, my visit to India in March emphasised again the great value of sharing knowledge. Through this and other visits to the region I have gained a deeper understanding of regional challenges. Norwegian soldiers and aid workers are present in Afghanistan, a country very different to our own, India, on the other hand has a shared history with Afghanistan for many centuries. I have sincere respect for Indian perspectives on regional matters and hope we can continue exchanging thoughts on this area. A more regional approach.
• Exchange of knowledge is key to dialogue and communication between nations. We still have much to learn from each other, and your deliberations during this conference represent the next step along this path. I wish you every success in your endeavors.

Thank you.