natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
After more than two years of fitful peace negotiations to solve the crisis in Darfur, an insurrection launched by a single group in 2003 has now mushroomed into numerous armed factions, all of which demand a seat at the table. 
Etter mer enn to år med stadig avbrutte forhandlinger for å løse krisen i Darfur, er én gruppe som startet et opprør i 2003 nå blitt til en hel rekke væpnede fraksjoner, og alle forlanger en plass ved forhandlingsbordet.
The war on terror has further challenged the appropriateness of dialogue. 
Krigen mot terror har skapt ytterligere tvil om hvorvidt dialog er veien å gå.
If we wish to see the extremists choose the political path, we need to keep the political channels open. 
Vil vi at ekstremistene skal velge en politisk vei, må vi holde de politiske kanalene åpne.
In the 1990s, negotiated settlement overtook military victory as the means of stopping wars. 
På 1990-tallet ble militær overmakt forbigått av forhandlingsløsninger som middel til å stanse kriger.
But Iraq and Afghanistan are exceptions, not trend-setters. 
– Men Irak og Afghanistan er unntak, ikke trendsettere.
Globalisation of the media uncovers conflict earlier, and indignation spreads rapidly, fuelling international consensus for peaceful resolution. 
Globaliserte medier avdekker konflikter tidligere, og harmen brer seg raskt og baner vei for internasjonal konsensus til fordel for fredelige løsninger.
For in most cases, warring parties need outside help in order to talk. 
For krigførende parter må som regel ha hjelp utenfra for å kunne snakke med hverandre.
However, although dialogue is more popular, it doesn’t always work. 
Men selv om dialog som metode stadig vinner terreng, er det ikke alltid den virker.
A number of intractable conflicts have, so far, proved impervious to mediation efforts – Israel/the Palestine Territory, Cyprus, Somalia, Sri Lanka – or, as in Iraq and Chechnya, the warring parties have rejected outright the possibility of dialogue. 
I flere hardnakkede konflikter har mekling så langt vist seg forgjeves – se Israel/Palestina, Kypros, Somalia, Sri Lanka – eller de krigførende partene har kontant avvist enhver dialog – som i Irak og Tsjetsjenia.
Two years of peace talks over Darfur have not stopped the killing. 
To års fredssamtaler om Darfur har ikke gjort slutt på voldshandlingene.
And even where mediation has resulted in peace agreements, as in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Cote d’Ivoire, Liberia, Burundi, South Sudan and Sierra Leone, few observers are celebrating yet. 
Og selv der mekling har munnet ut i fredsavtaler – som i Kongo, Elfenbenskysten, Liberia, Burundi, Sør-Sudan og Sierra Leone, er de fleste observatører avventende med å feire.
“Talk is cheap,” say the cynics. 
Kynikerne påpeker at det koster lite å diskutere.
This means getting the support of powerful states behind those efforts, such as China, India, the EU, regional powers, and above all the US, and to increase the legitimacy of broad policies of engagement. 
Det betyr at mektige stater må stille seg bak innsatsen: Kina, India, EU, regionale organisasjoner, og ikke minst USA – og at en bredt anlagt forhandlingspolitikk må få økt legitimitet.
Don’t cheapen talk – make dialogue work 
Dialog som virker – ikke la det bli med snakk
Read the whole speech here. 
Les hele talen her.
Environmental sustainability – a prerequisite for further growth 
Environmental sustainability – a prerequisite for further growth
Dramatic reduction in maternal mortality rates 
Dramatisk reduksjon i mødredødelighet
“It is encouraging that innovative methods can produce impressive results within a short timeframe. 
- Det er gledelig å se at nye tilnærmingsmåter kan gi svært gode resultater på kort tid.
These measures will be promoted by Norway in other countries as well. 
Dette er en måte å redusere mødredødeligheten på som Norge også vil fremme i andre land.
“Every third second a child dies and every minute a mother dies in childbirth. 
- Ett barn dør hvert tredje sekund og én mor dør i barsel hvert minutt.
This is unacceptable and the world must act to change this,” Stoltenberg says. 
Det er uakseptabelt og verden må stille opp for å endre dette, sier statsminister Jens Stoltenberg.
“These are simple measures which produce great result. 
– Dette er enkle virkemidler med stor effekt.
Projections show that by 2008 5.5 million India’s poor women will benefit from this programme. 
Prognosene viser at i 2008 vil 5,5 millioner av de åtte millioner fattige kvinner i India få glede av dette programmet.
The UN will conduct an independent analysis of this approach and the preliminary results, to evaluate the possibility of applying these methods in other countries. 
FN vil gjøre en uavhengig evaluering av denne tilnærmingsmåten og de foreløpige resultatene, for å se hvordan metoden kan brukes i andre land.
During his visit to India in 2005 Mr. Stoltenberg and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh agreed to cooperate on reaching the UN Millennium Goals four and five; to reduce child mortality and improve maternal health. 
Under sitt besøk i India i 2005 ble statsminister Stoltenberg og Indias statsminister Manmohan Singh enige om en avtale om samarbeid for å nå FNs tusenårsmål om å redusere barnedødelighet og bedre mødrehelse.
Norway’s contribution to this programme is nearly USD 100 million over five years, directed at five states in India. 
Det norske bidraget er satt til 500 millioner kroner over fem år fra 2006 til 2011, og er rettet mot fem utvalgte delstater.
These states represent sixty per cent of the country’s child mortality and the majority of Indian mothers dying in childbirth. 
Disse statene står for 60 prosent av Indias barnedødelighet og flertallet av mødre som dør i barsel.
Today 2.1 million children under the age of five die every year in India and 100,000 women die from maternal causes. 
I dag dør 2,1 millioner barn hvert år i India og 100.000 kvinner dør i forbindelse med fødsel.
”Women die during childbirth because they are not given access to basic health services, and their children die because they are not given medicines or vaccines against simple infections. 
– Kvinner dør i barsel fordi de ikke får tilgang til enkle helsetjenester, og barna deres dør fordi de ikke får medisin eller vaksine mot enkle infeksjoner.
Norway’s cooperation with India also aims at reducing child mortality. 
Samarbeidet med India legger også vekt på kampen mot barnedødelighet.
By 2009 the aim is to save half a million children annually through improved health services, and to raise the level of routine vaccination of children. 
Innen 2009 er målet å redde en halv million barn i året gjennom bedre helsetjenester og vaksinasjon.
The partnership will support and stimulate the accomplishment of India’s national health programme. 
Partnerskapet skal støtte opp om og stimulere til gjennomføring av Indias nasjonale helseplan.
Result-based financing is an important tool. 
Resultatbasert finansiering er et viktig virkemiddel.
Resources are channelled through multilateral organisations and local institutions. 
Ressursene kanaliseres gjennom multilaterale organisasjoner og lokale krefter.
Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg has said Norway over a period of ten years will grant one billion US dollars to efforts to improve maternal and child health. 
Statsminister Jens Stoltenberg har sagt at Norge over en tiårsperiode vil bevilge en milliard dollar til arbeidet for bedre barne- og mødrehelse.
Increased number of births in clinics: 
Flere kvinner føder på klinikk:
Spain and Norway to cooperate on new environmental technology 
Spania og Norge samarbeider om ny miljøteknologi
“The funding from the EEA and Norway Grants will help to strengthen cooperation between Norway and the beneficiary states, in part through this environmental technology programme. 
– EØS-midlene skal bidra til å styrke samarbeidet mellom Norge og mottakerlandene.
Spain and Norway complement each other well as cooperation partners in the environmental field,” said Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre. 
Spania og Norge står godt til hverandre som miljøsamarbeidspartnere, sier utenriksminister Jonas Gahr Støre.
Mr Støre pointed out that Spain is among the most important and advanced producers of new forms of renewable energy in the world. 
Han viser til at Spania er blant verdens største og mest avanserte produsenter av ny fornybar energi.
In total, Spain will receive around NOK 360 million in funding under the EEA for the 2009–2014 period. 
Totalt får Spania omlag 360 millioner kroner i EØS-midler fram til 2014.
Of this sum, around NOK 140 million has been earmarked for developing new environmental technology. 
Av dette er rundt 140 millioner kroner satt av til utvikling av ny miljøteknologi.
The agreement was signed in Madrid on Tuesday evening. 
Avtalen ble undertegnet i Madrid tirsdag kveld.
Gender equality is another priority area in Spain. 
Likestilling er et annet satsingsområde i Spania.
The Ombudsperson for Gender Equality and Anti-Discrimination is the Norwegian partner in this area. 
Likestillings- og diskrimineringsombudet er norsk partner.
Just under NOK 90 million has been allocated to this programme. 
I underkant av 90 millioner kroner er satt av til dette programmet.
In addition to renewable energy and gender equality, NOK 30 million has been allocated to an EEA scholarship programme for higher education students and researchers, NOK 35 million has been provided for an NGO fund, and NOK 35 million has been set aside for cultural heritage and cultural exchange programmes. 
I tillegg er det satt av 30 millioner kroner til en stipendordning for studenter og forskere, 35 millioner til et fond for frivillige organisasjoner og 35 millioner til kulturarv og kulturutveksling.
The EEA and Norway Grants are Norway’s contribution to reducing social and economic disparities in Europe. 
EØS-midlene er Norges bidrag til å redusere sosiale og økonomiske ulikheter i Europa.
The funds are also intended to strengthen cooperation between Norway and the beneficiary states. 
Støtten skal også bidra til å styrke samarbeidet mellom Norge og mottakerlandene.
For the 2009-2014 period, a total of around NOK 14 billion is available under the EEA and Norway Grants. 
EØS-midlene utgjør rundt 14 milliarder kroner fram til 2014.
Norway provides 97% of the funds, and Iceland and Liechtenstein provide the rest. 
Norges andel er 97 prosent, mens Island og Liechtenstein står for resten av bidraget.
Better protection of the world’s environmentally displaced 
Bedre beskyttelse av verdens miljøfordrevne
Today Foreign Minister Støre launched the idea of establishing a set of Nansen principles to improve protection of the world’s environmentally displaced. 
Utenriksminister Støre lanserte idag ideen om Nansen-prinsippene for bedre beskyttelse av verdens miljøfordrevne.
Every day people are driven from their homes because of drought, heat waves, torrential rains and floods. 
Hver dag tvinges mennesker til å forlate sine sine hjem på grunn av mer tørke, varmebølger, ekstrem nedbør og flom.
They are forced to flee, but do not have refugee status. 
De er drevet på flukt, men har ikke status som flyktninger.
“We must enhance the protection and rights of the environmentally displaced. 
- Vi må styrke beskyttelsen av og rettighetene til miljøfordrevne.
The idea of the Nansen principles was launched at the Nansen Conference, an international high-level conference on climate change and displacement, being held in Oslo on 6–7 June. 
Ideen om Nansen-prinsippene ble lansert på Nansenkonferansen, en internasjonal høynivåkonferanse om klimaendringer og flukt i Oslo 6.-7. juni.
The conference, which is the Government’s most important contribution to the celebration of Nansen as a humanist during the Nansen-Amundsen anniversary, was opened today by Foreign Minister Støre and Minister of the Environment and International Development Solheim. 
Konferansen er regjeringens viktigste bidrag til markeringen av Nansen som humanist i Nansen-Amundsen-året, og ble i dag åpnet av utenriksminister Støre og miljø- og utviklingsminister Solheim.
Norway and Switzerland mobilise support for the environmentally displaced 
Norge og Sveits mobiliserer for miljøfordrevne
Every year, floods, droughts and earthquakes force millions of people to flee their countries. 
Hvert år tvinger flom, tørke og jordskjelv millioner av mennesker på flukt fra sine hjemland.
Environmentally displaced people are particularly vulnerable when they cross international borders, since they do not have the legal protection accorded to political refugees. 
Miljøfordrevne mennesker er spesielt utsatt når de krysser internasjonale grenser uten rettsvernet politiske flyktninger har.
“Environmental displacement is a growing humanitarian problem due to climate change,” Minister of Foreign Affairs Espen Barth Eide said. 
- Klimaendringene gjør miljøfordrevne til et voksende humanitært problem, sier utenriksminister Espen Barth Eide.
On 2 October, Norway launched the Nansen Initiative in Geneva together with Switzerland. 
Sammen med Sveits lanserer Norge i dag det såkalte Nansen-initiativet i Genève.
But we must also find new ways to strengthen the rights of the environmentally displaced,” Mr Eide said. 
Men utenfor konvensjonen må vi finne nye måter å styrke rettighetene til miljøfordrevne, sier utenriksministeren.
Floods, droughts, and in the longer term rising sea levels threaten the livelihoods of a great many people. 
Flom og tørke, og på lengre sikt havnivåstigning, truer livsgrunnlaget til mange.
Those who live on islands and in deltas are particularly vulnerable. 
Øyboere og personer bosatt i deltaer er spesielt utsatt.
At the same time, many people are forced to flee for longer or shorter periods of time due to earthquakes and other disasters that are not climate-related. 
Samtidig drives også mange på flukt for kortere eller lengre tid på grunn av jordskjelv og andre ikke-klimarelaterte katastrofer.
The Nansen Initiative is a follow-up to the Nansen Conference on Climate Change and Displacement that the Norwegian Government hosted in Oslo in June 2011. 
Initiativet er en oppfølging av Nansen-konferansen om klimaendringer og flukt som regjeringen arrangerte i Oslo i juni 2011.
View from Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre for the publication Arms Control Today, Volume 38, Number 5, June 2008 
View from Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre for the publication Arms Control Today, Volume 38, Number 5, June 2008
On the 40th anniversary of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), there is a resurgence of interest in achieving the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons. 
On the 40th anniversary of the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), there is a resurgence of interest in achieving the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons.
It is welcome. 
It is welcome.
To be sure, the vision is not new. 
To be sure, the vision is not new.
My government, along with many others, has been a stalwart advocate of the elimination of nuclear weapons for decades. 
My government, along with many others, has been a stalwart advocate of the elimination of nuclear weapons for decades.
Indeed, all parties to the NPT have committed to this objective. 
Indeed, all parties to the NPT have committed to this objective.
Government policies in favour of a world free of nuclear weapons fall along a wide spectrum of commitment. 
Government policies in favour of a world free of nuclear weapons fall along a wide spectrum of commitment.
Nonetheless, they share a fundamentally aspirational quality. 
Nonetheless, they share a fundamentally aspirational quality.
Few if any government policies advocating elimination have fully reconciled themselves with countervailing realities, such as reliance on a nuclear umbrella or the difficult and complex challenges of transparency and verification in a world with only handfuls of nuclear weapons. 
Few if any government policies advocating elimination have fully reconciled themselves with countervailing realities, such as reliance on a nuclear umbrella or the difficult and complex challenges of transparency and verification in a world with only handfuls of nuclear weapons.
Thanks in no small measure to the courage and commitment of former Senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, and former Secretary of Defence William Perry, the prospects for reconciling aspiration with reality could be getting brighter.[1] 
Thanks in no small measure to the courage and commitment of former Senator Sam Nunn (D-Ga.), former Secretaries of State George Shultz and Henry Kissinger, and former Secretary of Defence William Perry, the prospects for reconciling aspiration with reality could be getting brighter.[1]
In the political space they have created, we might move beyond the false debate between the demand for overnight elimination and the demand that nuclear abolition must be “contemporaneous with the abolition of all evil in the world.”[2] 
In the political space they have created, we might move beyond the false debate between the demand for overnight elimination and the demand that nuclear abolition must be “contemporaneous with the abolition of all evil in the world.”[2]
There is a growing consensus that global security could be enhanced, not threatened, by the ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons. 
There is a growing consensus that global security could be enhanced, not threatened, by the ultimate elimination of nuclear weapons.
Earlier this year, I had the honour of hosting an international conference on nuclear disarmament with Senator Nunn and Secretary Shultz. 
Earlier this year, I had the honour of hosting an international conference on nuclear disarmament with Senator Nunn and Secretary Shultz.
Among the world’s leading experts on nuclear issues, there was a remarkable consensus on the advisability of moving toward elimination. 
Among the world’s leading experts on nuclear issues, there was a remarkable consensus on the advisability of moving toward elimination.
Participants also insisted that a prerequisite for major progress is personal engagement by national leaders of all states, nuclear and non-nuclear alike; their leadership is imperative for engaging key stakeholders and building public support. 
Participants also insisted that a prerequisite for major progress is personal engagement by national leaders of all states, nuclear and non-nuclear alike; their leadership is imperative for engaging key stakeholders and building public support.
They also agreed that taking disarmament seriously requires that we begin now in taking concrete steps in that direction. 
They also agreed that taking disarmament seriously requires that we begin now in taking concrete steps in that direction.
One of the most important steps is anticipating future ones. 
One of the most important steps is anticipating future ones.
When we envision a world with scores of weapons, rather than hundreds, we will have had to resolve some of the most difficult dilemmas surrounding deterrence and verification. 
When we envision a world with scores of weapons, rather than hundreds, we will have had to resolve some of the most difficult dilemmas surrounding deterrence and verification.
Effective answers to these questions will demand a consistent pattern of confidence and cooperation, among nuclear-weapon states and between nuclear- and non-nuclear-weapon states, far more developed than that of today. 
Effective answers to these questions will demand a consistent pattern of confidence and cooperation, among nuclear-weapon states and between nuclear- and non-nuclear-weapon states, far more developed than that of today.
There are at least five challenges that we can and should begin addressing now. 
There are at least five challenges that we can and should begin addressing now.
The first concerns regional conflicts in which states with nuclear weapons still consider them vital to regional stability. 
The first concerns regional conflicts in which states with nuclear weapons still consider them vital to regional stability.
We need much more regional dialogue in the Middle East, South Asia, and East Asia regarding the possible strategic consequences of a move toward nuclear disarmament. 
We need much more regional dialogue in the Middle East, South Asia, and East Asia regarding the possible strategic consequences of a move toward nuclear disarmament.
This challenge also invites us to reassess whether, in light of a powerful contemporary norm of nonuse, nuclear weapons continue to maintain a viable asymmetric role to superior conventional forces. 
This challenge also invites us to reassess whether, in light of a powerful contemporary norm of nonuse, nuclear weapons continue to maintain a viable asymmetric role to superior conventional forces.
The bottom line is this: How can we ensure that nuclear disarmament amid volatile regional dynamics serves to mitigate, rather than heighten, the risk of deadly conflict? 
The bottom line is this: How can we ensure that nuclear disarmament amid volatile regional dynamics serves to mitigate, rather than heighten, the risk of deadly conflict?
Second, how can we achieve nuclear elimination while preserving alliances at the heart of the international security architecture? 
Second, how can we achieve nuclear elimination while preserving alliances at the heart of the international security architecture?
NATO is the foremost case. 
NATO is the foremost case.
My government, collaborating with Germany, has sought to begin a candid discussion of this question within NATO. 
My government, collaborating with Germany, has sought to begin a candid discussion of this question within NATO.
We hope and will advocate that NATO gradually reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons in its security policy. 
We hope and will advocate that NATO gradually reduce its reliance on nuclear weapons in its security policy.
That would mean continued nuclear reductions and more emphasis on conventional deterrence. 
That would mean continued nuclear reductions and more emphasis on conventional deterrence.
The third and familiar challenge is that the genie is out of the bottle. 
The third and familiar challenge is that the genie is out of the bottle.
With the possibility of nuclear breakout, steps toward elimination require a global verification regime both for reductions in nuclear arsenals and for accounting of nuclear material that can provide adequate confidence among nuclear- and non-nuclear-weapon states alike. 
With the possibility of nuclear breakout, steps toward elimination require a global verification regime both for reductions in nuclear arsenals and for accounting of nuclear material that can provide adequate confidence among nuclear- and non-nuclear-weapon states alike.
This is a tall order. 
This is a tall order.
This challenge implies the hard truth that there will never be full “nuclear elimination” per se. 
This challenge implies the hard truth that there will never be full “nuclear elimination” per se.
Nuclear-weapon elimination must be reconciled with civilian nuclear perpetuity. 
Nuclear-weapon elimination must be reconciled with civilian nuclear perpetuity.
This demands a nonproliferation regime far more robust than that of today. 
This demands a nonproliferation regime far more robust than that of today.
Our fourth challenge is to develop a better understanding of how, as we move toward elimination, strategic stability would function and how it could be strengthened in a world with low numbers of nuclear weapons. 
Our fourth challenge is to develop a better understanding of how, as we move toward elimination, strategic stability would function and how it could be strengthened in a world with low numbers of nuclear weapons.
It is not clear that we yet have an adequate framework for assessing those risks. 
It is not clear that we yet have an adequate framework for assessing those risks.
Many Cold War-era assumptions about stability, whether about command and control or conventional deterrence, need revision. 
Many Cold War-era assumptions about stability, whether about command and control or conventional deterrence, need revision.
Fifth, we would profit from a full re-evaluation of nuclear risk in today’s world. 
Fifth, we would profit from a full re-evaluation of nuclear risk in today’s world.