TEDxRC2
Jonas Gahr Støre: In defense of dialogue
Filmed:
Readability: 4.1
401,365 views
In politics, it seems counterintuitive to engage in dialogue with violent groups, with radicals and terrorists, and with the states that support them. But Jonas Gahr Støre, the foreign minister of Norway, makes a compelling case for open discussion, even when our values diverge.
Jonas Gahr Støre - Foreign Minister of Norway
Jonas Gahr Støre is the Norwegian Foreign Minister, charged with working for Norway's interests internationally. Full bio
Jonas Gahr Støre is the Norwegian Foreign Minister, charged with working for Norway's interests internationally. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:15
Amongst all the troubling deficits we struggle with today --
0
0
3000
00:18
we think of financial and economic primarily --
1
3000
3000
00:21
the ones that concern me most
2
6000
2000
00:23
is the deficit of political dialogue --
3
8000
2000
00:25
our ability to address modern conflicts
4
10000
2000
00:27
as they are,
5
12000
2000
00:29
to go to the source of what they're all about
6
14000
3000
00:32
and to understand the key players
7
17000
2000
00:34
and to deal with them.
8
19000
2000
00:36
We who are diplomats,
9
21000
2000
00:38
we are trained to deal with conflicts between states and issues between states.
10
23000
3000
00:41
And I can tell you, our agenda is full.
11
26000
3000
00:44
There is trade, there is disarmament,
12
29000
2000
00:46
there is cross-border relations.
13
31000
3000
00:49
But the picture is changing,
14
34000
2000
00:51
and we are seeing that there are new key players
15
36000
3000
00:54
coming onto the scene.
16
39000
2000
00:56
We loosely call them "groups."
17
41000
3000
00:59
They may represent social, religious,
18
44000
3000
01:02
political, economic, military realities.
19
47000
3000
01:05
And we struggle with how to deal with them.
20
50000
2000
01:07
The rules of engagement:
21
52000
2000
01:09
how to talk, when to talk,
22
54000
2000
01:11
and how to deal with them.
23
56000
3000
01:14
Let me show you a slide here
24
59000
2000
01:16
which illustrates the character of conflicts
25
61000
2000
01:18
since 1946 until today.
26
63000
2000
01:20
You see the green
27
65000
2000
01:22
is a traditional interstate conflict,
28
67000
3000
01:25
the ones we used to read about.
29
70000
3000
01:28
The red is modern conflict,
30
73000
2000
01:30
conflicts within states.
31
75000
3000
01:33
These are quite different,
32
78000
2000
01:35
and they are outside the grasp
33
80000
3000
01:38
of modern diplomacy.
34
83000
3000
01:41
And the core of these key actors
35
86000
2000
01:43
are groups
36
88000
2000
01:45
who represent different interests
37
90000
2000
01:47
inside countries.
38
92000
2000
01:49
And the way they deal with their conflicts rapidly spreads to other countries.
39
94000
3000
01:52
So in a way, it is everybody's business.
40
97000
3000
01:56
Another acknowledgment we've seen during these years,
41
101000
2000
01:58
recent years,
42
103000
2000
02:00
is that very few
43
105000
2000
02:02
of these domestic interstate, intrastate conflicts
44
107000
4000
02:06
can be solved militarily.
45
111000
2000
02:08
They may have to be dealt with with military means,
46
113000
2000
02:10
but they cannot be solved by military means.
47
115000
3000
02:13
They need political solutions.
48
118000
2000
02:15
And we, therefore, have a problem,
49
120000
2000
02:17
because they escape traditional diplomacy.
50
122000
3000
02:20
And we have among states
51
125000
2000
02:22
a reluctance in dealing with them.
52
127000
2000
02:24
Plus, during the last decade,
53
129000
2000
02:26
we've been in the mode
54
131000
2000
02:28
where dealing with groups
55
133000
2000
02:30
was conceptually and politically dangerous.
56
135000
3000
02:33
After 9/11,
57
138000
2000
02:35
either you were with us or against us.
58
140000
2000
02:37
It was black or white.
59
142000
2000
02:39
And groups are very often
60
144000
2000
02:41
immediately label terrorists.
61
146000
2000
02:43
And who would talk to terrorists?
62
148000
3000
02:46
The West, as I would see it,
63
151000
2000
02:48
comes out of that decade weakened,
64
153000
2000
02:50
because we didn't understand the group.
65
155000
3000
02:53
So we've spent more time
66
158000
2000
02:55
on focusing on why we should not talk to others
67
160000
3000
02:58
than finding out how we talk to others.
68
163000
2000
03:00
Now I'm not naive.
69
165000
3000
03:03
You cannot talk to everybody all the time.
70
168000
2000
03:05
And there are times you should walk.
71
170000
3000
03:08
And sometimes military intervention is necessary.
72
173000
2000
03:10
I happen to believe that Libya was necessary
73
175000
3000
03:13
and that military intervention in Afghanistan was also necessary.
74
178000
3000
03:16
And my country relies on its security
75
181000
3000
03:19
through military alliance, that's clear.
76
184000
3000
03:22
But still we have a large deficit
77
187000
3000
03:25
in dealing with and understanding modern conflict.
78
190000
2000
03:27
Let us turn to Afghanistan.
79
192000
3000
03:30
10 years after that military intervention,
80
195000
2000
03:32
that country is far from secure.
81
197000
2000
03:34
The situation, to be honest, is very serious.
82
199000
3000
03:37
Now again, the military is necessary,
83
202000
3000
03:40
but the military is no problem-solver.
84
205000
3000
03:43
When I first came to Afghanistan in 2005 as a foreign minister,
85
208000
3000
03:46
I met the commander of ISAF,
86
211000
2000
03:48
the international troops.
87
213000
2000
03:50
And he told me that, "This can be won militarily, minister.
88
215000
3000
03:53
We just have to persevere."
89
218000
3000
03:56
Now four COM ISAF's later,
90
221000
2000
03:58
we hear a different message:
91
223000
2000
04:00
"This cannot be won militarily.
92
225000
2000
04:02
We need military presence,
93
227000
2000
04:04
but we need to move to politics.
94
229000
2000
04:06
We can only solve this through a political solution.
95
231000
3000
04:09
And it is not us who will solve it;
96
234000
3000
04:12
Afghans have to solve it."
97
237000
2000
04:14
But then they need a different political process
98
239000
2000
04:16
than the one they were given in 2001, 2002.
99
241000
4000
04:20
They need an inclusive process
100
245000
3000
04:23
where the real fabric of this very complicated society
101
248000
3000
04:26
can deal with their issues.
102
251000
2000
04:28
Everybody seems to agree with that.
103
253000
2000
04:30
It was very controversial to say three, four, five years ago.
104
255000
3000
04:33
Now everybody agrees.
105
258000
2000
04:35
But now, as we prepare to talk,
106
260000
3000
04:38
we understand how little we know.
107
263000
2000
04:40
Because we didn't talk.
108
265000
2000
04:42
We didn't grasp what was going on.
109
267000
3000
04:45
The International Committee of the Red Cross, the ICRC,
110
270000
3000
04:48
is talking to everyone,
111
273000
2000
04:50
and it is doing so because it is neutral.
112
275000
3000
04:53
And that's one reason why
113
278000
2000
04:55
that organization probably
114
280000
2000
04:57
is the best informed key player
115
282000
2000
04:59
to understand modern conflict --
116
284000
2000
05:01
because they talk.
117
286000
2000
05:03
My point is that you don't have to be neutral to talk.
118
288000
4000
05:07
And you don't have to agree
119
292000
2000
05:09
when you sit down with the other side.
120
294000
2000
05:11
And you can always walk.
121
296000
3000
05:14
But if you don't talk,
122
299000
2000
05:16
you can't engage the other side.
123
301000
2000
05:18
And the other side which you're going to engage
124
303000
2000
05:20
is the one with whom you profoundly disagree.
125
305000
3000
05:23
Prime Minister Rabin said when he engaged the Oslo process,
126
308000
3000
05:26
"You don't make peace with your friends,
127
311000
2000
05:28
you make peace with your enemies."
128
313000
2000
05:30
It's hard, but it is necessary.
129
315000
3000
05:33
Let me go one step further.
130
318000
2000
05:35
This is Tahrir Square.
131
320000
2000
05:37
There's a revolution going on.
132
322000
2000
05:39
The Arab Spring is heading into fall
133
324000
2000
05:41
and is moving into winter.
134
326000
2000
05:43
It will last for a long, long time.
135
328000
3000
05:46
And who knows what it will be called in the end.
136
331000
3000
05:49
That's not the point.
137
334000
2000
05:51
The point is that we are probably seeing,
138
336000
3000
05:54
for the first time in the history of the Arab world,
139
339000
2000
05:56
a revolution bottom-up --
140
341000
2000
05:58
people's revolution.
141
343000
2000
06:00
Social groups are taking to the streets.
142
345000
3000
06:03
And we find out in the West
143
348000
2000
06:05
that we know very little about what's happening.
144
350000
3000
06:08
Because we never talk to the people in these countries.
145
353000
4000
06:12
Most governments followed
146
357000
2000
06:14
the dictate of the authoritarian leaders
147
359000
2000
06:16
to stay away from these different groups,
148
361000
2000
06:18
because they were terrorists.
149
363000
4000
06:22
So now that they are emerging in the street
150
367000
2000
06:24
and we salute the democratic revolution,
151
369000
3000
06:27
we find out how little we know.
152
372000
2000
06:29
Right now, the discussion goes,
153
374000
2000
06:31
"Should we talk to the Muslim Brotherhood?
154
376000
3000
06:34
Should we talk to Hamas?
155
379000
2000
06:36
If we talk to them, we may legitimize them."
156
381000
3000
06:39
I think that is wrong.
157
384000
2000
06:41
If you talk in the right way, you make it very clear
158
386000
2000
06:43
that talking is not agreeing.
159
388000
3000
06:46
And how can we tell the Muslim Brotherhood,
160
391000
2000
06:48
as we should,
161
393000
2000
06:50
that they must respect minority rights,
162
395000
4000
06:54
if we don't accept majority rights?
163
399000
3000
06:57
Because they may turn out to be a majority.
164
402000
3000
07:00
How can we escape [having] a double-standard,
165
405000
3000
07:03
if we at the same time preach democracy
166
408000
3000
07:06
and at the same time
167
411000
2000
07:08
don't want to deal with the groups that are representative?
168
413000
2000
07:10
How will we ever be interlocutors?
169
415000
3000
07:13
Now my diplomats are instructed
170
418000
2000
07:15
to talk to all these groups.
171
420000
2000
07:17
But talking can be done in different ways.
172
422000
3000
07:20
We make a distinction between talking from a diplomatic level
173
425000
3000
07:23
and talking at the political level.
174
428000
3000
07:26
Now talking can be accompanied with aid or not with aid.
175
431000
3000
07:29
Talking can be accompanied with inclusion or not inclusion.
176
434000
3000
07:32
There's a big array
177
437000
2000
07:34
of the ways of dealing with this.
178
439000
2000
07:36
So if we refuse
179
441000
2000
07:38
to talk to these new groups
180
443000
3000
07:41
that are going to be dominating the news in years to come,
181
446000
3000
07:44
we will further radicalization,
182
449000
2000
07:46
I believe.
183
451000
2000
07:48
We will make the road from violent activities into politics
184
453000
3000
07:51
harder to travel.
185
456000
2000
07:53
And if we cannot demonstrate to these groups
186
458000
3000
07:56
that if you move towards democracy,
187
461000
2000
07:58
if you move towards taking part
188
463000
3000
08:01
in civilized and normal standards among states,
189
466000
3000
08:04
there are some rewards on the other side.
190
469000
3000
08:07
The paradox here
191
472000
2000
08:09
is that the last decade probably was a lost decade
192
474000
3000
08:12
for making progress on this.
193
477000
2000
08:14
And the paradox is that the decade before the last decade was so promising --
194
479000
4000
08:18
and for one reason primarily.
195
483000
3000
08:21
And the reason is what happened in South Africa:
196
486000
2000
08:23
Nelson Mandela.
197
488000
2000
08:25
When Mandela came out of prison
198
490000
2000
08:27
after 27 years of captivity,
199
492000
3000
08:30
if he had told his people,
200
495000
2000
08:32
"It's time to take up the arms,
201
497000
2000
08:34
it's time to fight,"
202
499000
2000
08:36
he would have been followed.
203
501000
2000
08:38
And I think the international community
204
503000
2000
08:40
would have said, "Fair enough.
205
505000
2000
08:42
It's their right to fight."
206
507000
2000
08:44
Now as you know, Mandela didn't do that.
207
509000
3000
08:47
In his memoirs, "Long Road to Freedom,"
208
512000
3000
08:50
he wrote that he survived
209
515000
2000
08:52
during those years of captivity
210
517000
3000
08:55
because he always decided to look upon his oppressor
211
520000
3000
08:58
as also being a human being,
212
523000
3000
09:01
also being a human being.
213
526000
3000
09:04
So he engaged a political process of dialogue,
214
529000
5000
09:09
not as a strategy of the weak,
215
534000
3000
09:12
but as a strategy of the strong.
216
537000
3000
09:15
And he engaged talking profoundly
217
540000
3000
09:18
by settling some of the most tricky issues
218
543000
2000
09:20
through a truth and reconciliation process
219
545000
3000
09:23
where people came and talked.
220
548000
2000
09:25
Now South African friends will know
221
550000
2000
09:27
that was very painful.
222
552000
2000
09:29
So what can we learn from all of this?
223
554000
3000
09:32
Dialogue is not easy --
224
557000
2000
09:34
not between individuals, not between groups, not between governments --
225
559000
3000
09:37
but it is very necessary.
226
562000
3000
09:40
If we're going to deal with political conflict-solving of conflicts,
227
565000
4000
09:44
if we're going to understand these new groups
228
569000
3000
09:47
which are coming from bottom-up,
229
572000
3000
09:50
supported by technology, which is available to all,
230
575000
3000
09:53
we diplomats cannot be sitting back in the banquets
231
578000
3000
09:56
believing that we are doing interstate relations.
232
581000
3000
09:59
We have to connect
233
584000
2000
10:01
with these profound changes.
234
586000
2000
10:03
And what is dialogue really about?
235
588000
2000
10:05
When I enter into dialogue,
236
590000
2000
10:07
I really hope that the other side
237
592000
2000
10:09
would pick up my points of view,
238
594000
2000
10:11
that I would impress upon them
239
596000
2000
10:13
my opinions and my values.
240
598000
2000
10:15
I cannot do that
241
600000
2000
10:17
unless I send the signals that I will be open
242
602000
2000
10:19
to listen to the other side's signals.
243
604000
3000
10:22
We need a lot more training on how to do that
244
607000
3000
10:25
and a lot more practice
245
610000
2000
10:27
on how that can take problem-solving forward.
246
612000
3000
10:30
We know from our personal experiences
247
615000
2000
10:32
that it's easy sometimes
248
617000
2000
10:34
just to walk,
249
619000
2000
10:36
and sometimes you may need to fight.
250
621000
3000
10:39
And I wouldn't say that is the wrong thing in all circumstances.
251
624000
3000
10:42
Sometimes you have to.
252
627000
2000
10:44
But that strategy seldom takes you very far.
253
629000
3000
10:47
The alternative is a strategy
254
632000
2000
10:49
of engagement and principled dialogue.
255
634000
2000
10:51
And I believe we need to strengthen this approach
256
636000
3000
10:54
in modern diplomacy,
257
639000
2000
10:56
not only between states,
258
641000
2000
10:58
but also within states.
259
643000
2000
11:00
We are seeing some new signs.
260
645000
2000
11:02
We could never have done
261
647000
2000
11:04
the convention against anti-personnel landmines
262
649000
2000
11:06
and the convention that is banning cluster munitions
263
651000
4000
11:10
unless we had done diplomacy differently,
264
655000
3000
11:13
by engaging with civil society.
265
658000
2000
11:15
All of a sudden,
266
660000
2000
11:17
NGOs were not only standing in the streets, crying their slogans,
267
662000
3000
11:20
but they were taking [them] into the negotiations,
268
665000
3000
11:23
partly because they represented the victims of these weapons.
269
668000
4000
11:27
And they brought their knowledge.
270
672000
2000
11:29
And there was an interaction
271
674000
2000
11:31
between diplomacy and the power coming bottom-up.
272
676000
3000
11:34
This is perhaps a first element
273
679000
2000
11:36
of a change.
274
681000
2000
11:38
In the future, I believe,
275
683000
2000
11:40
we should draw examples from these different illustrations,
276
685000
3000
11:43
not to have diplomacy
277
688000
2000
11:45
which is disconnected from people and civil society.
278
690000
3000
11:48
And we have to go also
279
693000
3000
11:51
beyond traditional diplomacy
280
696000
2000
11:53
to the survival issue of our times,
281
698000
2000
11:55
climate change.
282
700000
2000
11:57
How are we going to solve climate change through negotiations,
283
702000
3000
12:00
unless we are able to make civil society and people,
284
705000
3000
12:03
not part of the problem, but part of the solution?
285
708000
3000
12:06
It is going to demand an inclusive process of diplomacy
286
711000
3000
12:09
very different from the one we are practicing today
287
714000
3000
12:12
as we are heading to new rounds of difficult climate negotiations,
288
717000
3000
12:15
but when we move toward something
289
720000
2000
12:17
which has to be much more
290
722000
2000
12:19
along a broad mobilization.
291
724000
2000
12:21
It's crucial to understand, I believe,
292
726000
3000
12:24
because of technology and because of globalization,
293
729000
2000
12:26
societies from bottom-up.
294
731000
2000
12:28
We as diplomats
295
733000
2000
12:30
need to know the social capital
296
735000
2000
12:32
of communities.
297
737000
2000
12:34
What is it that makes people trust each other,
298
739000
3000
12:37
not only between states,
299
742000
2000
12:39
but also within states?
300
744000
2000
12:41
What is the legitimacy of diplomacy,
301
746000
3000
12:44
of the the solution we devise as diplomats
302
749000
3000
12:47
if they cannot be reflected and understood
303
752000
3000
12:50
by also these broader forces of societies
304
755000
3000
12:53
that we now very loosely call groups?
305
758000
4000
12:58
The good thing is that we are not powerless.
306
763000
2000
13:00
We have never had
307
765000
2000
13:02
as many means of communication,
308
767000
2000
13:04
means of being connected, means of reaching out,
309
769000
3000
13:07
means of including.
310
772000
2000
13:09
The diplomatic toolbox
311
774000
2000
13:11
is actually full of different tools we can use
312
776000
3000
13:14
to strengthen our communication.
313
779000
2000
13:16
But the problem is that we are coming out of a decade
314
781000
3000
13:19
where we had a fear of touching it.
315
784000
2000
13:21
Now, I hope, in the coming years,
316
786000
3000
13:24
that we are able to demonstrate through some concrete examples
317
789000
3000
13:27
that fear is receding
318
792000
3000
13:30
and that we can take courage
319
795000
2000
13:32
from that alliance
320
797000
2000
13:34
with civil society
321
799000
2000
13:36
in different countries
322
801000
2000
13:38
to support their problem-solving,
323
803000
2000
13:40
among the Afghans,
324
805000
2000
13:42
inside the Palestinian population,
325
807000
3000
13:45
between the peoples of Palestine and Israel.
326
810000
2000
13:47
And as we try to understand this broad movement
327
812000
3000
13:50
across the Arab world,
328
815000
2000
13:52
we are not powerless.
329
817000
2000
13:54
We need to improve the necessary skills,
330
819000
2000
13:56
and we need the courage to use them.
331
821000
2000
13:58
In my country,
332
823000
2000
14:00
I have seen how the council of Islamist groups
333
825000
5000
14:05
and Christian groups
334
830000
2000
14:07
came together, not as a government initiative,
335
832000
3000
14:10
but they came together on their own initiative
336
835000
2000
14:12
to establish contact and dialogue
337
837000
2000
14:14
in times where things were pretty low-key tension.
338
839000
4000
14:18
And when tension increased,
339
843000
2000
14:20
they already had that dialogue,
340
845000
3000
14:23
and that was a strength to deal with different issues.
341
848000
3000
14:26
Our modern Western societies
342
851000
2000
14:28
are more complex than before,
343
853000
2000
14:30
in this time of migration.
344
855000
2000
14:32
How are we going to settle and build a bigger "We"
345
857000
3000
14:35
to deal with our issues
346
860000
2000
14:37
if we don't improve our skills of communication?
347
862000
2000
14:39
So there are many reasons,
348
864000
2000
14:41
and for all of these reasons,
349
866000
2000
14:43
this is time and this is why we must talk.
350
868000
3000
14:46
Thank you for your attention.
351
871000
2000
14:48
(Applause)
352
873000
4000
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Jonas Gahr Støre - Foreign Minister of NorwayJonas Gahr Støre is the Norwegian Foreign Minister, charged with working for Norway's interests internationally.
Why you should listen
Norway sits on the edge of the strategically important North Atlantic and is blessed with oil, gas and marine resources. Its economy is open and busy, its social programs generous. As Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jonas Gahr Støre's job is to represent Norway in the international community and work to preserve the nation's peace and stability -- and to help create a modern multicultural society that welcomes immigrants and new traditions. This is not an abstract question after the shocking violence of 2011's terrorist attack on Norway.
Støre's approach to this task: We must talk.
He is a former executive director at the World Health Organization, and was also the Executive Chairman of the Norwegian think-tank ECON Analyse. Before becoming Foreign Minister he served as Secretary General of the Norwegian Red Cross from 2003 to 2005.
Jonas Gahr Støre | Speaker | TED.com