Chapter 8: Softly, softly into a changing world

	MV-22 Osprey landing on USS Iwo Jima at Norfolk Naval Base

A recent preoccupation of the Norwegian military has been the increasing shift in the global balance of power from West to East.

“We are already seeing China’s growing influence in everything from world stock markets and environmental questions to developments in Africa and the work of preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction to North Korea and Iran”, says the defence Ministry. “When we set China’s volume and growth together with corresponding developments in India and what is happening elsewhere in Asia and other parts of the world, we can see that the position of the West is, in relative terms, becoming weaker on the global scene.” Given the West’s growing awareness of the limitations of military power, the ministry is inclined to focus on “our capacity to make use of ‘soft power’ and to integrate it better with ‘hard power’”.

These developments in Norwegian thinking are explicitly linked to repeated remarks by American Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who has long advocated a dramatic increase in the budgets for what he described as “the civil instruments of national security”: diplomacy, strategic communication, foreign assistance, civic action and economic reconstruction and development. One of the most important lessons of experience from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he argues, is that “military success is not enough to ensure winning”.

Norway has made the same point in relation to Afghanistan – namely that security must be followed by economic progress, good governance, the development of a state based on law and order, internal reconciliation, the training and equipping of the security forces under democratic control and, not least, ensuring that the population at large have access to adequate food, housing, jobs and healthcare.

European ambitions
Juxtaposing the development from “a world with one superpower to a world with a number of strong actors” with the sharp reduction by the United States of its military presence in Europe and the likelihood that the attention of the United States would to an increasing extent be focused elsewhere, the government also stresses the “ambitious strides” taken by Europe in the development of a common security and defence policy.

“In the course of a few years the EU has progressed from having little more than a symbolic role in matters of security policy to a position in which it has a gradually growing real capability in this area. With 27 members, the EU now encompasses most of the countries of the European continent and increasingly represents Europe’s voice in the wider world.” At the same time, Russian policy is now shaped by a new economic freedom of action, growing self-confidence and will to assert itself, while also exhibiting the marks of the internal centralization of power and state direction... amid increasing signs of a more strained relationship between Russia and the West.

All concerned anticipate a continuing series of “aftershocks” as a result of the political and military upheavals involving the former Soviet Union, its former satellites and its neighbours during the 1990s. In Norway’s adjacent areas in the north, the renaissance of Russia’s capacity to flex its military muscles in the region is clearly a cause for concern, although Norwegian policy towards Russia continues to be characterized by “good neighbourliness”.

And as if this weren’t enough, at a time when the heavyweights – the EU, the United States, Russia and China – are jockeying for position vis-à-vis one another, unrest intensifies from Pakistan, through the Middle East and into Africa. Norwegian soldiers engaging in active combat in many of these areas are serious reminders of how involved Norway has become in matters of international security – and of how little significance geographical distances now have where its own security is concerned.

“The challenge is not only to find a solution to those conflicts which are already ablaze and where rifle barrels are smoking”, says the ministry. “It is also a question of conducting continuous diplomacy, a process in which Norway is strongly engaged, with the aim of preventing latent or frozen conflicts from catching fire.” Not to mention other “transboundary components that play a part in the creation of uncertainty around us” including international terrorism, the spread of weapons of mass destruction, energy security and climate change.

	Telemark Battalion undergoing special forces training at Rena military camp

These include upholding and strengthening the international rule of law through the UN – not solely out of regard for the poor and the oppressed in other parts of the world, but also because “a world order based on international law, in which harmonized rules form the framework for international relations, is in the best interests of smaller states”. A common law of the sea, for example, is of crucial importance for a country which has a large part of its economy linked to the resources in a maritime region which is six times the size of the country’s land area.

“The alternative to this international fellowship is the law of the jungle where the strongest prevail and the great powers go their own way”, says the ministry. “That is not in our interest. It is therefore politically incumbent upon Norway to work for a strong and respected United Nations... not least by stepping forward when the UN asks us to participate in international peace operations, whether it be under the blue flag or when the UN has given a mandate to operate under the NATO or EU flags.”

In any case, the northern areas have long been seen by successive governments as Norway’s most important strategic area, where the protection of Norwegian interests continue to require substantial resources.

Another “core value” is working with like-minded countries to maximize national security – e.g. through NATO and the mutual security guarantee which is fundamental to Norwegian defence and security policy. A new round of thinking through the organization, focus and strategic concept of the Alliance should lead to a strengthening of its presence and its activities in the member countries and in adjacent areas, so that NATO will not be seen mainly as an organization which only engages in operations outside its own territory.

For example, NATO should identify more closely with Norway’s cooperation with a number of other NATO countries concerning surveillance and security on and around Iceland, a project which involves large areas of the Norwegian Sea and the North Atlantic. Norway would also like to see improvements in NATO’s ability to lead and coordinate the military capabilities of member countries, enabling the Alliance to make better use of national expertise while gaining a greater insight into the security challenges existing in the various member countries’ adjacent areas.

New opportunities in cooperation with Nordic neighbours and with other like-minded friends in a wider European cultural community have also emerged in the wake of the Cold War. Countries and regions previously walled off from one another now have the possibility of working together based on acknowledgement of the fact that there are common security challenges to face.

Widening circles
One result of this development is that the weighty institutions in Norway’s part of the world have not only increased in size, but have also grown more flexible. Countries that are not members of NATO or the EU are offered various cooperative arrangements and partnerships. “The circles are widening and overlapping one another, and new cooperation constellations are coming into existence.” Norway has, for example, been successful in establishing close cooperation with the EU in areas including defence and security. One tangible outcome of this is scores of Norwegian soldiers on standby for the EU’s Nordic Battlegroup.

The thinking behind this policy of constructive engagement in NATO, in the Nordic area and in the EU applies equally to the need to strive for a more unified approach between sectors. In the UN this is discussed in terms of “integrated missions”; in NATO, the talk is of a “comprehensive approach”, while in the EU it’s “development and security”. At a fundamental level these discussions are all about the same thing, and Norway is one of the driving forces in this work, particularly in light of its heavy military commitment in Afghanistan.

Many observers are struck by how clearly Norwegian soldiers have seen the need for a comprehensive approach to the military, political, developmental and humanitarian aspects if a peace operation is to succeed. This applies at all levels from the contingent commander to the 20-year-old fresh from his initial military service. The consensus is that everyone involved must be drawn in: military and civil, government agencies and NGOs, the authorities locally and foreign participants. This is brought home to us every day in Afghanistan. From here it is only a short step to the importance of non-military means in preventing, damping down and resolving conflicts. Although the Armed Forces constitute a vital instrument of security policy, there are many others – diplomacy, economy, aid, fisheries, energy – involved in determining the quality of Norway’s defence and security policy.

The Armed Forces understand the need for such a comprehensive approach to security, and this understanding includes acknowledgement that the will and the capability to exercise military force is a necessary, but not all-encompassing, aspect of our insurance policy.

In this context, the government can address a wide range of issues in areas that might normally be seen as outside the remit of the Armed Forces. How do security concerns figure in commercial Norwegian-Russian cooperation in the northern areas? What are the security implications of building Norwegian-financed schools in Afghanistan? Will security benefit from the quiet work being put in by Ministry of Defence personnel in helping to reform the defence sector in the western Balkans and trying to put over the message that defence arrangements must be under democratic control?

There can be no precise answers to such questions – but they do illustrate how broadly the government must think, and how many sectors of society must be involved in one way or another in the formation of a comprehensive security policy.

Oil for Development
Constructive engagement in the cause of long-term security is one of the big ideas behind the Norwegian “Oil for Development” (OfD) initiative, the purpose of which is to assist developing countries to administer their petroleum resources in a way that reduces poverty, generates economic growth, promotes the welfare of the population in general and at the same time is environmentally sustainable. As at April 2009, OfD involved more than 25 countries, and investment in the programme had increased from NOK 148 million in 2007 to NOK 205 million in 2008.

The initiative, launched by the Norwegian government in September 2005,is described as “a thematic broadening of the petroleum sector development assistance that Norway has provided since the early 1980s, which has amounted to approximately NOK 440 million over the whole period 1994 to 2004”. OfD builds on an integrated approach to the petroleum sector that centres around three management areas: resources, revenue, and environment. The principle is that developing countries can be helped to manage petroleum resources as Norway has, using its oil wealth to fund development for its own people, “Sharing these experiences constitutes a key component of OfD”.

“Good governance is a cross-cutting dimension throughout these themes”, according to the latest annual report. Plans for an ambitious series of anti-corruption courses are a good example of this aspect of the OfD initiative.

Raising the threshold
One additional hurdle facing the Norwegian Armed Forces in the 21st century – and possibly the most difficult – is the formidable task of restructuring the Armed Forces. This entails any number of challenges, foremost among them the aim of raising the military threshold to such a high level that “no rational adversary would be able to impose its will on Norwegian authorities without resorting to a use of force that would be totally unacceptable to the global community and to the Alliance”.

In that regard, as former defence minister Strøm-Erichsen has famously argued: “Perhaps we should ask ourselves whether the time for today’s four-year planning cycle is past. This arrangement entails continuous doubt and uncertainty for all concerned – we have hardly given birth to one long-term plan before we have embarked on the next. I am really and truly not sure whether it is still appropriate that we should, at fouryearly intervals, throw the whole of our defence up in the air and then put the pieces together again. It is quite possible to engage in a process of continuous development while at the same time making changes.” Clearly, in such a rapidly changing world, such a process may be not only possible but necessary.

As early as 1814 – the year, remember, in which modern Norway finally gained its constitution after centuries of absentminded rule by the Danes – a lecturer at the Military Academy declared that officers in the Norwegian Armed Forces would need “the clarity of thought of a mathematician, the imagination of a poet and the enthusiasm of an apostle”. Clearly, these words of wisdom are just as relevant today as Norway faces the realities of the 21st century and the Norwegian defence and security industry is prepared to continue to support the Armed Forces and other government bodies in this spirit.

The next section of this publication features a selection of companies operating in the fields of military and security technology in which this country excels, and which are more urgently needed than ever amid the uncertainties of the new millennium.