natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The international conference in Oslo on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity 15–16 April can be followed on web TV.
Konferansen om menneskerettigheter og seksuelle minoriteter i Oslo 15. og 16. april kan føles på nett-tv.
The international conference in Oslo on human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity 15–16 April can be followed on web TV.
﻿﻿﻿Konferansen om menneskerettigheter og seksuelle minoriteter i Oslo 15. og 16. april kan følges på nett-tv.
The interpretation of the conferences available live or on demand via this portal is intended to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of the proceedings.
The interpretation of the conferences available live or on demand via this portal is intended to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of the proceedings.
Only the original speech is authentic.
Only the original speech is authentic.
The European Commission and its interpretation service (DG Interpretation) cannot be held liable for damage or loss of any kind whatsoever arising out of the use of the interpretation into any other language.
The European Commission and its interpretation service (DG Interpretation) cannot be held liable for damage or loss of any kind whatsoever arising out of the use of the interpretation into any other language.
Leangkollen, 7 February 2012
Leangkollen, 7. februar 2012
On a more fundamental level, the countries were also united by common values – about how our societies should be organised, namely: a commitment to democracy, free institutions, human rights, open economies, the rule of law, and the freedom to choose your own life, Støre said in his address.
On a more fundamental level, the countries were also united by common values – about how our societies should be organised, namely: a commitment to democracy, free institutions, human rights, open economies, the rule of law, and the freedom to choose your own life, sa Støre bl.a. i sitt foredrag.
The 47th Annual Security Conference, Den norske Atlanterhavskomite (DNAK).
The 47th Annual Security Conference, Den norske Atlanterhavskomite (DNAK).
Theme: Trans-Atlantic values and interests in a multipolar world.
Theme: Trans-Atlantic values and interests in a multipolar world.
Session III: Trans-Atlantic values for future generations.
Session III: Trans-Atlantic values for future generations.
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, good morning to you all,
Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends, good morning to you all,
Thank you for the invitation to speak at this conference.
Thank you for the invitation to speak at this conference.
Initially, I was invited to the first day.
Initially, I was invited to the first day.
However, I have spent the last two days in (“the Free and Hanseatic city of”) Hamburg, meeting Nordic and Baltic colleagues, German politicians and representatives of the dynamic Norwegian–German business communities there.
However, I have spent the last two days in (“the Free and Hanseatic city of”) Hamburg, meeting Nordic and Baltic colleagues, German politicians and representatives of the dynamic Norwegian–German business communities there.
I would also like to thank the Norwegian Atlantic Committee for holding these conferences every year.
I would also like to thank the Norwegian Atlantic Committee for holding these conferences every year.
I have attended quite a few.
I have attended quite a few.
The conference has become a platform – a valuable arena – for discussing security policy here in Northern Europe as well as global security and other broad foreign policy issues.
The conference has become a platform – a valuable arena – for discussing security policy here in Northern Europe as well as global security and other broad foreign policy issues.
My topic today is “transatlantic values for future generations”.
My topic today is “transatlantic values for future generations”.
I don’t know too much about the future, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to address “a future audience” – that includes you, young people from all over the transatlantic alliance.
I don’t know too much about the future, but I’m glad to have the opportunity to address “a future audience” – that includes you, young people from all over the transatlantic alliance.
A hearty welcome to you all.
A hearty welcome to you all.
The speakers following me represent not only the geographical breadth but also the future of the alliance.
The speakers following me represent not only the geographical breadth but also the future of the alliance.
Now, about the concepts: values – common views and destiny.
Now, about the concepts: values – common views and destiny.
Practising common values.
Practising common values.
My address has three parts:
My address has three parts:
First, a brief historical perspective and look at the role of values and interests when the transatlantic alliance was founded.
First, a brief historical perspective and look at the role of values and interests when the transatlantic alliance was founded.
Second, I want to see whether we are now approaching “the end of a defining decade” in international relations.
Second, I want to see whether we are now approaching “the end of a defining decade” in international relations.
And third, a few words on the times we are living in, turbulent – with economic crises and geopolitical changes – what are the threats today?
And third, a few words on the times we are living in, turbulent – with economic crises and geopolitical changes – what are the threats today?
(Technological and economic imbalances).
(Technological and economic imbalances).
Now, first, a historical perspective.
Now, first, a historical perspective.
What are “transatlantic values”?
What are “transatlantic values”?
(To what extent do we share a platform of common values?)
(To what extent do we share a platform of common values?)
Shaped an alliance.
Shaped an alliance.
On 4 April 1949, after over a year of negotiations, 12 countries gathered in Washington DC to formally establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
On 4 April 1949, after over a year of negotiations, 12 countries gathered in Washington DC to formally establish the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
In his speech on the occasion, President Harry Truman said that NATO should be “a shield against aggression and the fear of aggression – a bulwark which will permit us to get on with the real business of government and society, the business of achieving a fuller and happier life for all our citizens”.
In his speech on the occasion, President Harry Truman said that NATO should be “a shield against aggression and the fear of aggression – a bulwark which will permit us to get on with the real business of government and society, the business of achieving a fuller and happier life for all our citizens”.
A shield against aggression.
A shield against aggression.
A bulwark.
A bulwark.
A “fuller and happier life”.
A “fuller and happier life”.
“Get on with the real business of government and society”.
“Get on with the real business of government and society”.
By stating this, Truman stressed from the very beginning a fundamental value for NATO: security.
By stating this, Truman stressed from the very beginning a fundamental value for NATO: security.
Shield.
Shield.
Protection.
Protection.
For we should remember that security or safety itself is a value – in fact, I believe that it is the most fundamental value that NATO should protect.
For we should remember that security or safety itself is a value – in fact, I believe that it is the most fundamental value that NATO should protect.
(However, isn’t “security” also a foreign policy “interest”?
(However, isn’t “security” also a foreign policy “interest”?
You will, no doubt, discuss this later today.)
You will, no doubt, discuss this later today.)
Today, many of us in Europe take security for granted.
Today, many of us in Europe take security for granted.
Historically, this has often not been the case, in fact it never is!
Historically, this has often not been the case, in fact it never is!
Quite to the contrary – through most of our history, achieving protection, security, safety, and certainty about the future has been one of the central aims of foreign policy, in fact – of any foreign policy.
Quite to the contrary – through most of our history, achieving protection, security, safety, and certainty about the future has been one of the central aims of foreign policy, in fact – of any foreign policy.
The very reason for foreign policy.
The very reason for foreign policy.
This is a fact – an important historical lesson to remember – as it is also true for us today.
This is a fact – an important historical lesson to remember – as it is also true for us today.
Collective defence as expressed by NATO – that an attack against one member is an attack against us all – is our strongest safeguard.
Collective defence as expressed by NATO – that an attack against one member is an attack against us all – is our strongest safeguard.
It is our most potent deterrent.
It is our most potent deterrent.
This is and will remain our primary “shield from aggression”, to use President Truman’s words.
This is and will remain our primary “shield from aggression”, to use President Truman’s words.
The idea of an Atlantic alliance was already debated during the Second World War:
The idea of an Atlantic alliance was already debated during the Second World War:
After World War Two, Trygve Lie from Furuset/Grorud in Oslo (the Foreign Minister of the Norwegian Government in exile in England, later the UN’s first Secretary General), lectured at universities and wrote articles about the need to establish a formal alliance between the democracies bordering the North Atlantic.
After World War Two, Trygve Lie from Furuset/Grorud in Oslo (the Foreign Minister of the Norwegian Government in exile in England, later the UN’s first Secretary General), lectured at universities and wrote articles about the need to establish a formal alliance between the democracies bordering the North Atlantic.
Lie called the Norwegians “a people of the Atlantic” and argued in favour of an alliance formed by the “Atlantic powers”: Great Britain and the United States.
Lie called the Norwegians “a people of the Atlantic” and argued in favour of an alliance formed by the “Atlantic powers”: Great Britain and the United States.
– Quite a contrast to the situation after World War I – and the result of certain lessons learned.
– Quite a contrast to the situation after World War I – and the result of certain lessons learned.
a strong mutual strategic interest in a military alliance,
a strong mutual strategic interest in a military alliance,
a common history of standing together against Nazism and totalitarianism,
a common history of standing together against Nazism and totalitarianism,
and a common geographical position in the North Atlantic.
and a common geographical position in the North Atlantic.
Now, the democracies that gathered in April 1949 in Washington DC were different – but well united in many different ways.
Now, the democracies that gathered in April 1949 in Washington DC were different – but well united in many different ways.
They were united by
They were united by
common geography,
common geography,
shared history, and
shared history, and
the need to stand together.
the need to stand together.
In sum:
In sum:
a commitment to democracy,
a commitment to democracy,
free institutions,
free institutions,
human rights,
human rights,
open economies,
open economies,
o the rule of law,
o the rule of law,
o and the freedom to choose your own life.
o and the freedom to choose your own life.
On a more fundamental level, the countries were, of course, also united by common values – about how our societies should be organised, namely:
On a more fundamental level, the countries were, of course, also united by common values – about how our societies should be organised, namely:
The driving force behind creating a military alliance was of course not only the fact that they – that we – shared some common values, but rather our mutual interests in gaining security by standing together.
The driving force behind creating a military alliance was of course not only the fact that they – that we – shared some common values, but rather our mutual interests in gaining security by standing together.
(Our interests – protect our shared values – go hand in hand).
(Our interests – protect our shared values – go hand in hand).
This is illustrated by the fact that while Article 5 of the Washington Treaty is well-known, few are familiar with Article 2.
This is illustrated by the fact that while Article 5 of the Washington Treaty is well-known, few are familiar with Article 2.
Article 2 deals with our common values – and it was these shared ideals that held us together during fifty years of Cold War, I believe.
Article 2 deals with our common values – and it was these shared ideals that held us together during fifty years of Cold War, I believe.
Part of Article 2 reads: “the Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions … by promoting conditions of stability and well-being … they will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies …” etc.
Part of Article 2 reads: “the Parties will contribute toward the further development of peaceful and friendly international relations by strengthening their free institutions … by promoting conditions of stability and well-being … they will seek to eliminate conflict in their international economic policies …” etc.
So, one of my points is this: the solidity of Article 5 was based on the strength of common values and shared ideals.
So, one of my points is this: the solidity of Article 5 was based on the strength of common values and shared ideals.
Now: moving 40 years on from 1949 to 1989: Our values were also important when the Cold War came to an end.
Now: moving 40 years on from 1949 to 1989: Our values were also important when the Cold War came to an end.
And we remember how the role, purpose and future of NATO were very much debated in the 1990s: (This was or is underreported in the media, in my view).
And we remember how the role, purpose and future of NATO were very much debated in the 1990s: (This was or is underreported in the media, in my view).
What is NATO’s purpose?
What is NATO’s purpose?
We remember the whole discussion – how the phrase “out of area or out of business” was coined by those in favour of NATO expansion to maintain the relevance of the Alliance, while for many others, the concept of “out of area” was almost taboo at that time.
We remember the whole discussion – how the phrase “out of area or out of business” was coined by those in favour of NATO expansion to maintain the relevance of the Alliance, while for many others, the concept of “out of area” was almost taboo at that time.
(Apropos the 1990s, yesterday in Hamburg I met Helmut Schmidt, and we celebrated 20 years of the Baltic Sea States’ cooperation (Østersjørådet), 1992–2012).
(Apropos the 1990s, yesterday in Hamburg I met Helmut Schmidt, and we celebrated 20 years of the Baltic Sea States’ cooperation (Østersjørådet), 1992–2012).
Our ideals were part of our appeal to our friends in Central and Eastern Europe as they began to throw off the shackles of Communism.
Our ideals were part of our appeal to our friends in Central and Eastern Europe as they began to throw off the shackles of Communism.
I still believe that the Alliance, to these prospective new members, was essential in providing peace and stability for Europe.
I still believe that the Alliance, to these prospective new members, was essential in providing peace and stability for Europe.
And even after the existential threat from the Warsaw Pact disappeared, the core values that helped forge the Alliance at the beginning are still at the heart of our cooperation.
And even after the existential threat from the Warsaw Pact disappeared, the core values that helped forge the Alliance at the beginning are still at the heart of our cooperation.
We should ask ourselves: What did these countries from Central and Eastern Europe seek?
We should ask ourselves: What did these countries from Central and Eastern Europe seek?
A road out of communism – out of external dominance – into a family and community of shared values.
A road out of communism – out of external dominance – into a family and community of shared values.
This is my first message to you.
This is my first message to you.
The core, the transatlantic values are still there.
The core, the transatlantic values are still there.
Times have changed but a solid platform stands.
Times have changed but a solid platform stands.
The Alliance has stood the test.
The Alliance has stood the test.
The new Strategic Concept agreed in Lisbon (2010) defines three core tasks for NATO:
The new Strategic Concept agreed in Lisbon (2010) defines three core tasks for NATO:
collective defence,
collective defence,
crisis management,
crisis management,
and cooperative security.
and cooperative security.
The 2010 Strategic Concept also sums up the purpose of NATO in a single sentence, which is not very different from the ambition articulated in Truman’s 1949 speech, namely that “NATO’s fundamental and enduring purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means”.
The 2010 Strategic Concept also sums up the purpose of NATO in a single sentence, which is not very different from the ambition articulated in Truman’s 1949 speech, namely that “NATO’s fundamental and enduring purpose is to safeguard the freedom and security of all its members by political and military means”.
Freedom, security.
Freedom, security.
Now, security threatened.
Now, security threatened.
The events of 9/11 2001 had dramatic consequences in the United States and around the world.
The events of 9/11 2001 had dramatic consequences in the United States and around the world.
In fact, 9/11 and its consequences have been a defining factor in international relations in the last decade.
In fact, 9/11 and its consequences have been a defining factor in international relations in the last decade.
The events of 9/11 led to NATO invoking Article 5 for the first time in our history.
The events of 9/11 led to NATO invoking Article 5 for the first time in our history.
Attacked by a group, not by a state.
Attacked by a group, not by a state.
Based on a broad mandate from the UN Security Council, the Alliance gradually became engaged in the conflict in Afghanistan, far outside its area of responsibility, leading up to the formal takeover of the ISAF-operation in 2003.
Based on a broad mandate from the UN Security Council, the Alliance gradually became engaged in the conflict in Afghanistan, far outside its area of responsibility, leading up to the formal takeover of the ISAF-operation in 2003.
This operation was – and still is – carried out at the request of and on behalf of the United Nations, based on a unanimous resolution in the Security Council.
This operation was – and still is – carried out at the request of and on behalf of the United Nations, based on a unanimous resolution in the Security Council.
The Alliance has subsequently been joined by a number of other countries – there are around 50 countries contributing to ISAF (about a fourth of all the countries in the world).
The Alliance has subsequently been joined by a number of other countries – there are around 50 countries contributing to ISAF (about a fourth of all the countries in the world).
While we have achieved several important milestones in Afghanistan, the road has been difficult and the operation has also proven to be more challenging than originally anticipated.
While we have achieved several important milestones in Afghanistan, the road has been difficult and the operation has also proven to be more challenging than originally anticipated.
In 2003, another military operation was started, in Iraq, also in the wake of 9/11.
In 2003, another military operation was started, in Iraq, also in the wake of 9/11.
There is no doubt that the run-up to this war was a difficult time for the transatlantic alliance and it drove a “wedge” into transatlantic relations.
There is no doubt that the run-up to this war was a difficult time for the transatlantic alliance and it drove a “wedge” into transatlantic relations.
While the Afghanistan operation expressed our determination to defend our security, our common set of values, many allies believed this was not the case with Iraq, as there was no UN Security Council mandate.
While the Afghanistan operation expressed our determination to defend our security, our common set of values, many allies believed this was not the case with Iraq, as there was no UN Security Council mandate.
NATO played no role in the decision to invade or in the running of the military campaign in Iraq.
NATO played no role in the decision to invade or in the running of the military campaign in Iraq.
While many of the anti-terrorism efforts were necessary in order to prevent another terrorist attack and the proliferation of Al-Qaida (and their affiliates and organisations inspired by them), some of the measures taken at this time were clearly at odds with our ideals and core values.
While many of the anti-terrorism efforts were necessary in order to prevent another terrorist attack and the proliferation of Al-Qaida (and their affiliates and organisations inspired by them), some of the measures taken at this time were clearly at odds with our ideals and core values.
There are rules that need to be followed also in wars.
There are rules that need to be followed also in wars.
This is the challenge for our democracies.
This is the challenge for our democracies.
To protect our deepest values and safeguard our security.
To protect our deepest values and safeguard our security.
Another point I would like to make here is this: Who do we talk to in international politics?
Another point I would like to make here is this: Who do we talk to in international politics?
Who do we have to talk to – in order to meet the challenges of finding a shared road to peace?
Who do we have to talk to – in order to meet the challenges of finding a shared road to peace?
And who are our counterparts?
And who are our counterparts?
(And: Isn’t the ability to talk, to create a room for dialogue, in itself also a “value”, an “ideal”, or even an “interest”?
(And: Isn’t the ability to talk, to create a room for dialogue, in itself also a “value”, an “ideal”, or even an “interest”?
What do you think?
What do you think?
Think about it?
Think about it?
Is the last decade a “lost decade”?
Is the last decade a “lost decade”?
Reflect on diplomacy: States versus groups.
Reflect on diplomacy: States versus groups.
The problem today is that our counterparts are not traditional states, but groups inside countries.)
The problem today is that our counterparts are not traditional states, but groups inside countries.)
In the immediate years after 9/11 there was a tendency for every armed opposition group to be labelled as terrorists.
In the immediate years after 9/11 there was a tendency for every armed opposition group to be labelled as terrorists.
You were – you are – not supposed to talk to terrorists.
You were – you are – not supposed to talk to terrorists.
This created little room to manoeuvre when it came to peace and reconciliation efforts.
This created little room to manoeuvre when it came to peace and reconciliation efforts.
As I have emphasised many times, I am a strong defender of the importance of dialogue.
As I have emphasised many times, I am a strong defender of the importance of dialogue.
(I have written an article in the New York Review of Books on the subject that you’ll find on the web, and I have also posted “a TED talk” – see YouTube or Ted.com).
(I have written an article in the New York Review of Books on the subject that you’ll find on the web, and I have also posted “a TED talk” – see YouTube or Ted.com).