Norway's Carvings

Norway has now emerged as a 'peace superpower' involved in brokering peace in some 15 conflicts across the world stretching from Columbia to the Philippines. Despite being a small Scandinavian state, what makes Norway a popular peace broker? Is there any interest to involve itself in faraway Sri Lanka?

At the macro level, Norway has a long tradition of peace. Around 60,000 Norwegians have participated in 27 UN peacekeeping operations. The first UN Secretary-General, Trygve Lie, was a Norwegian. Norway's modern history is devoid of imperialism, and, as a small country, it is not perceived to be a threat. It holds independent views in international affairs, which reinforces its impartiality, and its foreign policy has been coherent and consistent despite changes of government in Oslo.

At the micro level, Norway has experienced personnel with expertise in conflict resolution for peace mediation. Their resilience to stay on despite all odds and criticism is a big advantage. Interestingly, Oslo has the knack of combining peace brokering with humanitarian aid to conflict-ridden countries; its dexterity in involving voluntary agencies as partners in this task is unique. Its policy of 'no stick, but carrots' is more popular than the US' 'carrot and stick' policy. It is not a coincidence that Norway is world's largest per capita aid donor. The prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, given in Oslo every year, has added an extra feather in its peace hat. Norway, therefore, is a first priority for those who want to establish contacts with their enemies for negotiations.

This does not mean that Norway's peacemaking missions are not driven by national interests. Peacemaking has given Oslo a "soft superpower" status, immense moral authority and influence in international affairs. It can now gain the attention of big powers at any time, an impossibility otherwise. For instance, its involvement in Sri Lanka and Afghanistan has gained Oslo direct access to Washington to discuss issues relevant to its own national interests. Security concerns, which are now globalised, are another factor. Though most conflicts are internal, they pose serious threats to regional and global security. The presence of refugees generated by conflicts within its borders leading to resentment by rightist forces is an additional factor here.

Sri Lankan Safari

Sri Lanka is not a stranger to Norway. NORAD (Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation) is known in the Island due to its involvement in Integrated Rural Development Projects since the 1970s. Norway is also one of Sri Lanka's major donors for over two decades. Development work, in addition to Norway's image as a peacemaker, are the two main reasons for the choice of Norway as a facilitator in the Island's ethnic conflict. France was the earlier choice of President Chandrika, but it was unacceptable to the LTTE. Oslo was chosen because it was acceptable to both the conflicting parties, but also to India and the US, the regional and global powers. Norway's role was not frowned upon since it has neither political nor economic interests in the region.

Norway's involvement commenced in 1997, though a formal request by Chandrika Kumaratunga was only made in February 2000. It took two more years for Oslo to start work on the ground when the Sri Lankan Government and the LTTE signed a ceasefire agreement, which is still in place. It has been monitored by the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission (SLMM) under the guidance of Norway since then. The success of facilitation during the six rounds of talks during 2002-2003 and some breakthroughs in the negotiations.

"Oslo! Go Slow! Norway! No way!"

But the talks hit a snag and the process has been stalemated since March 2003 despite Norway's efforts to revive it. Unfortunately, Oslo is now considered to be a part of the problem in Sri Lanka. Sinhalese hardliners view Norway as pro-LTTE. Norway's co-sponsorship of the resolution against the Sri Lankan government at the UN Human Rights Commission in 1987, SLMM's "lethargy" on Tigers' ceasefire violations, presence of numerous Sri Lankan Tamil refugees in Norway and so on are cited as examples of Oslo's "tilt" towards the Tigers. But the Tigers are dissatisfied since Norwegians has not prevailed upon Colombo to concede its demand.

Oslo's attitude has been: "One has to expect such things when getting involved in a sensitive conflict." True. Tempers would run high when sensitivities are high, and Sri Lanka cannot be an exception. What is required is patience, which Norway has in abundance. Both the Sri Lankan Government and the LTTE know that only Norway could deliver the goods. At the same time, Oslo has to restart the stalled peace process with help from the international community. The present moment of recovery from the Tsunami devastation is propitious.