Wildfire>_ special! feature ! Expediency wins as abandons its humanitarian principles ! Richard Lennane! ! As he opened a meeting on nuclear So it is more than a little strange – and disarmament verification in Oslo on 16 disturbing – that even as Brende is November, Norway’s foreign minister opening verification meetings in Oslo, he Børge Brende sounded like a man is backing away from the humanitarian dedicated to pursuing his nation’s goal of principles that support his professed goal, a world free of nuclear weapons. “We and retreating into the kind of shallow need measures that can bring about real, political expediency more commonly genuine disarmament,” Brende said, associated with authoritarian regimes and highlighting Norway’s role. “Nuclear military dictatorships. disarmament requires the participation of At the October meeting of the United both nuclear weapon states and non- Nations committee dealing with nuclear-weapon states.” international security and disarmament, Brende’s apparent enthusiasm for other diplomats were taken aback as eliminating nuclear weapons seems to fit Norway abruptly abandoned its previous with Norway’s longstanding support for support for humanitarian approaches to disarmament, as part of a foreign policy . Norway abstained underpinned by fundamental humanitarian on a resolution dealing with the principles. As Norway’s ambassador told humanitarian consequences of nuclear the United Nations in October, the weapons, when it had previously international community has a supported similarly-worded joint “responsibility to eliminate weapons that statements. More surprisingly, Norway cannot be used in accordance with voted against a South African-sponsored international humanitarian law”. Norway resolution on “ethical imperatives for a is well known internationally as a nuclear-weapon-free world”, a declaratory champion of humanitarian approaches to resolution that merely listed the peace and security, and was a leading humanitarian and ethical reasons for player in the development of successful eliminating nuclear weapons and required treaties banning antipersonnel landmines no specific action. and cluster munitions. Diplomats were further disconcerted by More recently, Norway began an the Norwegian delegation’s explanation of influential process to examine the its votes. “Unfortunately, the emerging humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, common understanding of a fact-based hosting an international conference in humanitarian initiative has now been Oslo in 2013 that sparked widespread undermined, and the initiative is by many interest in exploring humanitarian associated with efforts to achieve a legal approaches to nuclear disarmament. instrument banning nuclear weapons”, Successive Norwegian governments have Norway’s representative said. “Under the also long recognized the crucial role of a current political circumstances, these vibrant and independent civil society in efforts will not bring us closer to a world pursuing Norway’s foreign policy interests. free of nuclear weapons.” This 2! extraordinary statement amounts to an humanitarian implications of its own admission that Norway is turning away security arrangements, and moves to from the humanitarian approach because crudely suppress civil society criticism? it does not like where it might lead Brende has defied the wishes of the (awkward discussions within NATO, for Norwegian parliament, dismayed a large example). This is expediency, not portion of the international community, principle. and trampled on Norway’s noble tradition Worse still, the government has since of apolitical support for civil society. He compounded the damage by peremptorily has cheapened the principles on which withdrawing funding from a range of civil Norway’s foreign policy is built, and is society organizations working to advance consequently eroding the respect and nuclear disarmament on humanitarian influence that Norway enjoys grounds, including Norwegian People’s internationally. Aid, the International Campaign to Fortunately, there is still time to retrieve Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), and the situation. The funding to NGOs the Nobel Peace Prize-winning working on nuclear disarmament can be International Physicians for the restored. The resolutions that Norway Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW). failed to support at the UN security and Defending Norway’s actions to the disarmament committee will be taken up parliament, Børge Brende said “it is not by the General Assembly as a whole on 7 correct to claim that Norway has changed December. Norway can take the its position on disarmament this year”. opportunity to change its vote, and restore But contrast Norway’s voting explanation its reputation. and NGO funding cuts with its statement 30 November 2015 to the Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear ! Weapons in December 2014: “We all share ! the goal of a world free of nuclear ! weapons. Listening to the experts, Richard Lennane is the Chief Inflammatory reaching that goal seems more urgent than Officer of Wildfire>_, an NGO exposing ever before … We welcome initiatives that doublethink and hypocrisy in nuclear policies, and contribute to meaningful progress towards promoting a treaty banning nuclear weapons. He our common goal of nuclear disarmament is a former United Nations disarmament official and non-proliferation. The humanitarian and Australian diplomat. Follow him on Twitter: approach to disarmament and non- @Wildfire_v proliferation is a contribution to achieving progress”. There is much more at stake here than consistency on nuclear weapons policy. By choosing expediency over humanitarian principles in this instance, because it happens to suit Norway’s political and security circumstances, Brende is undermining the entire basis of Norway’s humanitarian foreign policy. How can Norway expect to be taken seriously when it engages other nations on humanitarian issues such as the use of explosive weapons in populated areas, when it exempts itself from confronting the

www.wildfire-v.org