News of Norway, issue 6, 1998
Her educational background includes a Cand. mag. (equivalent to a B.A. degree) in sociology, political science and history from the University of Oslo. She has M.A. level courses in political science from the UIO as well.
When she's not a politician, Haga belongs to the Foreign Service. Among her foreign stations is a post with the Norwegian U.N. delegation in New York and the Embassy in New Delhi, India. From 1989-90, she was the personal secretary of the Minister of Development Cooperation, Tom Vraalsen.
Haga spoke to "News of Norway" over the phone from her office in Oslo, Norway.
Why establish a more formal Barents Cooperation?
The main reason for establishing a Barents Cooperation is that we want to increase contacts at all levels between the countries that belong to the Barents region, which are Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. We think it is important, taking into account that there was a border which was absolutely closed for so many years, that people in the region are able to get together to build down whatever suspicion was there.
In addition, I would say that the Barents Cooperation also has a security policy aspect to it. All of us, including the U.S. and Norway, are very eager to integrate Russia into both global mechanisms for cooperation and certainly also European mechanisms for cooperation.
How important then is the creation of trust in the initial phase of the cooperation and what roles does the educational and cultural projects play in the creation of trust?
Well first of all, the creation of trust is terribly important. I believe we need to develop cooperation in the educational sector, in the cultural sector, in the environmental sector, we need to have local communities working together. That this, very down to earth people-to-people cooperation, will also eventually lead to cooperation in the business sector. I believe all these grass root activities will form a platform for cooperation also at a higher level, to put it that way.
To some extent our expectations to the Barents Cooperation maybe from the start were, should I say, slightly too high. We thought that business would easily come together and that business would develop rapidly. We have seen that that has not happened. But it certainly is a goal also to develop business contacts. When we now try to put even more emphasis on the people-to-people contacts, the grass root contacts, that is sort of a realization that we need to build that basis before we are able to move forward heavily in the business area.
During H.M. King Harald V and Queen Sonja's visit to Russia in May, a framework agreement was signed between Norway and Russia that has been in the works for some time. What is the importance of this agreement, especially for the environmental side of the cooperation?
[...] The environmental challenges in Northwest Russia are just immense. They are enormous when it comes to nuclear safety. But they are certainly also enormous when it comes to air pollution, when it comes to how they utilize their energy-they base much of their energy consumption on nuclear power, which is probably not the safest way of producing energy.
In the area of nuclear safety, the agreement that we signed in May is nothing but extremely important. The main stumbling blocks for moving ahead with concrete projects have been bureaucratic difficulties related to taxation and nuclear liability. It was necessary to have a clear understanding that Norway would not be responsible if anything were to go wrong on the Russian side.
The lack of a framework agreement blocked implementation of a lot of projects that we have had in the pipeline for quite some time now. The framework agreement doesn't fully solve all the problems when it comes to taxation, but it certainly solves such a big part of it that we are now able to move forward on implementation. That is of course what we are looking for. As a part of the framework agreement, we have established a Norwegian-Russian Commission for dealing with these issues, agreeing on priorities, etc., etc.
We had the first meeting of the Commission in Moscow at the end of July, and that meeting moved ahead very, very well. We sat down at that meeting and discussed priorities, went through details on how far the planning process had come for each project, how we move from where we are now and further on. The first meeting of the Commission, which is the result of the framework agreement, really made us move forward.
How much of the financial burden is Norway carrying in terms of the environmental clean ups or nuclear clean ups?
The amount which is required to actually clean up is tremendous, and that is also why Norway certainly is not able to pick this task up on its own. And that is also why we now, on the basis again of the framework agreement, will move ahead on establishing an international action plan for cooperation. We discussed that with the Russians during the meeting of the Commission.
We will have to go one more round in Moscow because of some, again, bureaucratic hurdles. We are planning to host a meeting in Oslo this fall where we bring all the countries together that take an interest in this issue and move to develop this international action plan. I am encouraged when it comes to mobilizing international support for dealing with these issues. Certainly, the U.S. is extremely important and supportive. The EU Commission is very supportive, and also individual countries like France, like the Dutch, like the Brits, and of course the other Nordics-Sweden and Finland-in particular. I am pretty optimistic when it comes to mobilizing more international support, both politically and financially.
The U.S. is one of 9 observation countries in the Barents Region. What role do the 9 countries play and how active of a role have they been playing up to now?
The degree of the activity varies between countries. Certainly we are very happy that the U.S., and Strobe Talbot personally, have gotten very much involved. It means a lot to the cooperation. It proves that this is not only something that is important for a small part of Norway, a small part of Russia, a small part of Sweden and Finland; it is important for many countries that we are able to develop this sensitive area in a proper way. So I would say that the support we get from the observers is extremely important in making us move forward.
To specifically touch a little bit on the U.S., what seems to be their interest in the cooperation and have they been doing anything to help specifically, financially and things like that?
In the nuclear safety area, they have been supportive also financially and there are projects that we are working on together, that is the U.S., Norway and Russia. We also have the AMEC cooperation. That is a cooperation within the military area, where Norway, the U.S. and Russia work together to deal with environmental issues. These three parties work closely together and it's a potentially very important cooperation. U.S. support for the AMEC cooperation has been very important and again, I believe the framework agreement would make us move faster also in this area. But when it comes to the Barents Cooperation, the general political support is just very important by itself.
You are planning to visit the U.S. in October, where political talks in Washington, D.C., and participation at a seminar in Boulder, Colo., is on the agenda. On a personal note, do you have anything you wish to achieve while you are over here?
First of all, I am very fond of the U.S. I was an exchange student in Delaware. That's a long time ago, '77-'78. I went to high school, 12th grade. I was also posted in NY at the Norwegian Mission to the UN. When I am not a politician I belong to the Foreign Service. Considering my background, my affections for the U.S., personally, are high.
And I must admit, more importantly, in the context of my visit in October, the U.S. is probably our most important international partner. We are partners in NATO, we have a lot of common interests, we have a lot of programs and projects that we work on together. Middle East is of course one issue that could be mentioned in particular. It is important for us to keep contacts going at the political level and to be able to discuss the issues that are on our common agenda. [...]
How big of a role does the private sector in Norway play in this in terms of getting them pulled into projects?
We see a lot of interest. Not too much has materialized when it comes to the Northwest of Russia. The Norwegian business sector has experienced that it is easier to work in the St. Petersburg area or in Moscow than it is to work in Northwest Russia. But certainly the potential is there, and we do see a lot of interest. There are Norwegian companies already in Northwest Russia, but they are not too many. Some of them have good experiences; some of them do not.
Do you have any specific examples?
Statoil is not doing badly in Northwest Russia, which is very important. I believe, when Statoil succeeds, that also proves to others that it is possible to succeed. It sends the right signals to the rest of the business community.
How big of an impact will the economic trouble in Russia have on the cooperation and now especially the devaluation of the Ruble?
That is very hard to tell at the moment.
Do you think it will have some impact?
Yes, I am afraid it will. We have already seen that the cooperation that takes place in the area of fisheries has been affected. The economic instability in Russia sure is a concern.
How has it been effected?
Some [Norwegian] companies have already said that they would be more careful in their cooperation with Russia. Further instability in the Russian economy would have a negative effect. However, it underscores the need to continue to work with the Russians for them to develop their business framework. If they are able to get their house in order, then the potential is there and the interest is there.
The Barents Cooperation is set up with two equal bodies, the Barents Council and the Regional Council. What's the thought behind this kind of structural organization?
First of all, you would not find many constructions like that around the world. It is a pretty unique structure. It has proved very successful.
If I were to evaluate these two different mechanisms, or pillars as you could call them, I would actually say that the regional pillar has been the most important and the most successful.
It's at the local level that we actually have achieved the most. Not to say that we haven't achieved anything at the intergovernmental level. But we certainly have achieved a lot at the regional level. More than five fundamental projects are under implementation. I am convinced that we could bring our experience from what I call a two pillar system to for example the Baltic Sea cooperation.
Any visions for the Barents Cooperation? Where do you see it heading, in lets say five years from now?
In another five years, I hope that the living conditions on the Russian side are very much improved. I hope that we can have exchanges with the northwestern part of Russia as we have them with our other neighboring countries in the area.
See also related articles: "The Barents Cooperation: A common effort in the high north," "Framework agreement opens doors in environmental cooperation," and "Karen Fredrickson: An American perspective."