2005 marks the 100th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Norway and Russia, which were established following the denunciation of the Swedish-Norwegian Union (1814-1905). However, the two countries have been “neighbors for a thousand years,” as expressed in the title of a joint cultural exhibition that opened in St. Petersburg in April 2005. During all this time, our two nations have never been at war. Even in times of tension, peace prevailed across our common border in the north. Norway and the Soviet Union were allies in the fight against Nazism and the Soviet army liberated the county of Finnmark.

Fifteen years ago, relations between Norway and Russia entered a new phase. Economic, energy and environmental cooperation and cross-border cultural and people-to-people relations are now as important as military and political issues were in the period before 1990, when they dominated our bilateral agenda. For several decades Norway and Russia have jointly managed the fisheries resources in the Barents Sea. The importance of the Barents Region and the northern areas as a whole has increased. The increasing importance of the petroleum denunciation of the Swedish-Norwegian Union resources in these waters presents both Norway and Russia with new and promising opportunities, and at the same time paves the way for bringing our two countries closer together.

Nuclear safety has become a major area of cooperation that also involves other nations in the G-8 Global Partnership. Our cooperation on nuclear safety and security in Northwestern Russia has become an increasingly important part of our bilateral relations over the last decade. During this period, Norway has provided some $160 million for these efforts. We intend to continue working with Russia on reducing the risk of nuclear accidents and pollution from nuclear facilities in Northwestern Russia, and on preventing radioactive and fissile materials from falling into the wrong hands. Norway will also give high priority to the bilateral cooperation between supervisory and administrative authorities in this field.

While our two governments are working together to secure a clean environment and the sound management of fish stocks and nuclear materials, a growing number of companies in our two countries are forming links through joint ventures, trade and investment. This is particularly true of the petroleum sector, where we hope to see even closer cooperation in Norwegian and Russian offshore fields in the north in the near future. Norwegian companies, with 30 years of experience of technologically challenging North Sea development, have a lot to offer Russia. The development of the giant offshore Shtokman gas field is a case in point.

Norway and Russia are two of the world’s three largest oil exporters and the main suppliers of natural gas to European energy markets. The prominence of the issue of global energy security, partly as a result of the instability in major oil-producing regions like the Middle East and of the current high oil prices, means that petroleum production in our northern areas has considerable strategic and economic importance. At the same time, both countries have important military, political and ecological interests in the north that need to be taken into account. Norway therefore welcomes closer and more comprehensive bilateral dialog with Russia in all these areas.

An agreement on a maritime delimitation line in accordance with established international legal practice and principles will make it possible for us to expand our cooperation to include what is currently the disputed area. Norway is ready to continue negotiations when Russia has concluded its internal administrative review process.

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIPS

One of the most effective ways of promoting international peace and stability is through regional and sub-regional cooperation structures. Norway and Russia are active members of the Barents Council, the Arctic Council and the Council of Baltic Sea States, where we work for regional integration and cross-border cooperation in areas such as health, environmental protection, migration and trafficking.

The political and military cooperation between NATO and Russia has reached yet another milestone with Russia’s signature of the Partnership for Peace Status of Forces Agreement (PfP SOFA) at the NATO-Russia Council meeting in Vilnius in April. Since the establishment of the Council, NATO-Russia relations have undergone a remarkable transformation and are now a central element in the emerging Eurasian security architecture. This will strengthen our ability to respond to the threats posed by terrorism, drug trafficking and other challenges in and around Afghanistan, Central Asia and the Caucasus region. We look forward to the Duma’s ratification of the PfP SOFA agreement, which will pave the way for intensified bilateral military cooperation between Norway and Russia.

The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe also play important roles in promoting peace, stability, democracy and human rights in the Eurasian area. Lately, however, several CIS member states, including Russia, have criticized the OSCE for taking an unbalanced approach by focusing more on the human than on the politico-military and economic dimensions, while Western members have criticized CIS states for the opposite. Following the “tulip revolution” in Kyrgyzstan, positive signals have come from both sides regarding the need to reach agreement on the way forward. Norway will contribute to the efforts to find balanced solutions that will ensure an effective role for the OSCE in both the human and the security dimensions.

There can be no doubt about the need for international cooperation in order to strengthen democratic institutions and human rights in the OSCE area. There is simply no such thing as a trade-off between human rights and security. On the contrary, measures to protect human rights must go hand in hand with measures to improve security, in the same way as peace diplomacy needs to be combined with development cooperation. The two sets of measures are mutually reinforcing: history has shown us that enhancing security at the expense of democracy and human rights is doomed to failure.

The Chechen conflict has for years been a source of friction between Russia and Western countries. The situation in Chechnya is complex and difficult. Terrorists and extremist groups have committed terrible atrocities, including the horrific Beslan massacre. No cause can justify terrorist acts. Serious human rights violations have been committed by all sides. This is unacceptable. So are the attempts to support separatism or to change borders by force. Like other OSCE states, Norway remains committed to the Helsinki Acts. We fully support Russia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, in the North Caucasus and elsewhere.

Norway continues to advocate a peaceful, political solution to the conflict, and to provide humanitarian aid to refugees in the North Caucasus. We are involved in supporting the Russian Government’s rehabilitation plans for the region, including the construction of a new school in Beslan and the reconstruction of the educational system in Chechnya. In these efforts we are co-operating with UN agencies like OCHA, UNHCR and UNESCO, and with NGOs like the Norwegian Refugee Council, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent, and Médecins sans Frontières. These organizations are doing a tremendous job under difficult conditions to help people in the North Caucasus, and they need all the help they can get from donors and from Russian federal and regional authorities.

NORWAY’S ROLE IN PEACE PROCESSES

Norway is among the largest donors to international development cooperation, giving close to 1 percent of its GNI, or roughly $2 billion, each year through UN agencies, NGOs and bilateral cooperation. Norway’s role as a mediator and facilitator in peace, reconciliation and conflict resolution processes worldwide is an integral part of this picture.

Promoting peaceful relations and helping to resolve conflicts between peoples and nations is a logical foreign policy objective for small states like Norway. With our open economy, we are vulnerable to events outside our borders. At the same time, it is important for us to protect our significant investments in development and human security in partner countries. Just as it is true that poverty and lack of development increase the risk of conflict, so it is equally true that conflict and the absence of peace are an obstacle to sustainable development.

Our participation in peace processes takes a number of different forms. It ranges from acting as official facilitator of negotiations, as in Sri Lanka and the Philippines; to sponsoring a back channel for secret negotiations, as in the Middle East; to being a partner in an international coalition, as in Sudan, Ethiopia-Eritrea, Somalia, Colombia and Guatemala.

Five years ago, Norway was asked by the parties to the conflict in Sri Lanka to facilitate a peace process. We were naturally willing to help, and in 2002 the Government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) entered into the present cease-fire agreement. Three years of cease-fire is by far the longest period without hostilities since the war began in 1983, and it has probably saved thousands of lives.

At the moment direct negotiations between the parties have been suspended. The delay in resuming talks is partly due to the uncertain political and security situation and the parties’ need to develop confidence in one another as negotiating partners. However, the post-tsunami situation has created an opportunity for implementing confidence-building measures through the efforts to establish a joint mechanism for channelling funds for rebuilding the tsunami-affected areas in the north and east.

We hope 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 favorable climate for peace talks in the longer term.

Three months ago a truly historic event occurred in Africa: the Government of Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) signed the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Nairobi. The agreement marks the end of one of Africa’s longest and bloodiest civil wars.

On the other hand, the conflict in Darfur has not yet been resolved, and continues to be a matter of great concern. A workable solution will require a new form of nation-building based on the sharing of power and wealth between the center and the regions. It must also take into account a large number of cultural, ethnic, religious and historical issues. The peace agreement provides a blueprint for such a solution. Now it needs to be applied to other regions in the country as well: the sustainability of the peace will depend on this. Supporting the implementation of the peace agreement is a key element of our Sudan policy.

Norway’s political support to and involvement in the Sudan peace process is the result of our long-standing commitment to humanitarian assistance to Sudan, the efforts of Norwegian NGOs in the country and many years of cooperation between various academic institutions in Norway and Sudan.

Through our humanitarian efforts we have been involved with both parties to the conflict. Humanitarian assistance to the war-affected areas in the south brought us in particularly close contact with the SPLM/A, a relationship that proved to be very valuable to the Government of Sudan during the crucial last round of peace talks. It has also facilitated our assistance to the parties, which took the form of communicating and explaining their positions to each other.

Norway’s involvement in the peace process in Sudan has been coordinated in an informal troika with the U.S.A. and the UK. However, efforts to sustain peace and development in Sudan must enjoy a wider support by other countries. The first international donor conference for Sudan was a welcome success in this regard. Representatives of more than 60 countries and international organizations met in Oslo on 11-12 April, and donors pledged more than $4.5 billion to Sudan for the period 2005-2007. This shows that there is international commitment to the implementation of the peace agreement.

In the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, the prospects for a resumption of the peace process are more promising than they have been for a long time. Israel’s decision to withdraw from the settlements in Gaza and four settlements on the West Bank is of vital importance: if implemented, it could be a major step toward bringing the peace process back on track. But the international community must be resolute in insisting that the withdrawal is carried out in accordance with the Road Map for Peace.

The Palestinian Authority must continue its efforts to fully control all armed Palestinian groups. The understanding reached in Egypt last month between the Palestinian Authority and a majority of the Palestinian militant organizations, first and foremost Hamas, was another significant step. So is Hamas’ decision to take part in local and parliamentary elections. Only political solutions can bring peace to the Middle East. The terrorist infrastructure must be dismantled, and all weapons collected. 

The respective governments have to overcome enormous challenges. They must deal with domestic considerations and with opposition to the process on both sides: there are still far too many who wish to stop or derail the process. However, it is important that the parties refrain from actions that will result in short-term political gain at the expense of long-term progress.    

The international community must seize this new opportunity and support the parties in their efforts to revitalize the peace process. A concerted, targeted effort on the part of the Quartet is needed to give it further momentum. Here Russia, along with the other Quartet members – the U.S., the UN and the EU – has a decisive role to play.

While important steps have been taken to bring the process back on track, there are still significant problems with regard to the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The construction of the wall on occupied Palestinian land and the expansion of settlements could jeopardize the two-state solution. Construction must stop before it undermines progress. A “Gaza first, Gaza last” solution will never bring peace to the Middle East. The developments in East Jerusalem and the West Bank must therefore have top priority in the dialog between the international community and Israel. 

The difficult economic and humanitarian situation for the Palestinian population poses another threat to the process, since poverty breeds extremism. Norway has been heading the international donors’ efforts to support the Palestinian community for more than a decade, efforts that have been an essential part of the thrust for a peaceful solution.

NOT MERE ALTRUISM

Norway’s efforts are always part of a broader setting: Norway’s role as a peace facilitator follows from our long-standing support for the UN mandate for peace and security. It is built on a tradition of engagement in humanitarian assistance and development cooperation, and reinforces the success and sustainability of these efforts.

We also tend to support other leading actors rather than taking the lead ourselves. In certain cases Norway does take a leading role, but this is always at the request of the parties involved in the conflict.

Norway is also a patient facilitator. There is broad and long-established political consensus in Norway on our policy of promoting peace and reconciliation. One example is our engagement in Sri Lanka, which has been maintained by three different foreign ministers from three different political parties.

One particular area in which we have been active is inter-religious dialog since in the past decade religion has gained an increasingly important position on the international political agenda. Religion is usually not the only or the main reason for a conflict, but it is often exploited for political purposes. Religion, like patriotism, is easy to misuse, because people often express their anger, their desires, and even their aims in religious terms. Religious sentiments can be used to pave the way for peaceful, durable political solutions to conflicts. Cooperation between religious leaders and religious communities can be a powerful force for peace, and create more understanding and cooperation within a country and between countries and peoples. Thus, although religion is often regarded as part of the problem, it can in fact be a valuable part of the solution.

Another important factor is our emphasis on cooperating with national and international NGOs. Norwegian NGOs have decades of experience, gained from their activities in different parts of the world. They have valuable networks and hands-on knowledge of the various regions, and skills and expertise that we are able to draw on.

Norway is regarded in many quarters as being impartial. Norway has no colonial past, and is usually perceived as having no hidden political or economic agenda. Since it is difficult for a country to achieve success on its own, we work together with other international actors. This means that we can combine our own resources with those of others, and it ensures the necessary support for the processes we are involved in.

Finally, an important aspect of Norway’s involvement is that we regard ourselves as a peace facilitator, not a peacemaker. As a facilitator we do our utmost to support the parties, but at the end of the day the will to bring about peace must come from the parties themselves.

As regards why we choose to be so heavily involved, one reason is that, like many others, we feel we have a moral obligation to contribute to the peaceful resolution of conflicts and thus improve the lives of people in other parts of the world.

But it is not altruism alone that drives us. Contributing to peace in other parts of the world is in our own interest.

Today there are fewer conflicts between countries. On the other hand, we are witnessing an intensification of internal, intra-state conflicts, which are the subject of greater international attention.

Globalization 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, information and ideas, providing new opportunities for cooperation and joint endeavors. On the other hand, instability and insecurity now spread more easily. Internal conflicts have negative effects far beyond the actual site of the conflict, through illegal migration, disease, environmental degradation, organized crime and terrorism.

Internal conflicts have thus become a global concern. Yesterday’s humanitarian situations are today’s core security policy issues. Peace diplomacy is one instrument in our quest for peace. But the quest for peace is also very much a question of providing development assistance and ensuring good governance and respect for human rights. It may also involve using military means when the situation calls for it, but then as a measure of last resort. No country can isolate itself from globalization and its effects, either positive or negative. Norway, like Russia and other nations, stands to gain overall from the benefits of increased cross-border communication and interaction. But greater intergovernmental cooperation is needed to exercise democratic control. States must work together – nationally, bilaterally, regionally and multilaterally – in order to more effectively tackle these conflicts, and the related international threats and challenges.

Norway’s experience of peace processes and development assistance has shown us that people in poor or conflict-prone parts of the world, without hope and without jobs, are more easily recruited by groups or ideologies that advocate violence and conflict. And we believe that eventually the consequences of such conflicts will come home to haunt us, even in our supposedly safe and prosperous part of the world. This is why, in addition to more altruistic motives, we choose to provide development assistance and support peace processes. By combating poverty, pollution and disease we are also eliminating potential breeding grounds for hatred, extremism and terrorism.

Of course, political and ethnic grievances must be tackled, but this must be done by political and peaceful means. Peace and stability must be built patiently, using all the means at our disposal – diplomatic, political, and economic – so as to ensure lasting, sustainable development. To achieve this goal, we must work together. Norway and Russia should be partners in this endeavor.