Worries in the High North

In this week's issue, the Economist is featuring an article that highlights Russia's conduct in the Arctic areas. It describes this area, "cold, empty and rich in fish and minerals", as "a tempting prize for a big, confident country." Russian fighter jets have been frequently flying very close to Norwegian territory, something that while not illegal sends some worrying signals. The recent €4 billion emergency loan to Iceland is also a bit worrying - not in itself, but with regards to whatever Russia wants in return.

I have written some posts about this issue already; "The Bear and Us - Russia and Norway" and "The Bear and Us Revisited". My point in those articles was that although the Cold War is over, we should be very wary with regards to our Eastern neighbor.

As a tiny little country of only four and a half million people we are not in an ideal position if we should get into a conflict with Russia. But we still need to do everything in our power to stand our ground, and send clear signals of our own standpoint. Also, as I see it, we have no other choice than to keep both of our feet firmly grounded in NATO. It may be pointed out that "NATO presence is fitful" in the High North, as the Economist does. Still, it is a grave mistake to argue for us to distance ourselves from NATO and our Western allies, as some of our socialist parties do. We cannot afford to stand alone, and NATO is our best bet not to do so.

It has been sad to see that even our dear former Prime Minister, Haakon Lie, has been arguing against taking our share of responsibilities in NATO operations around the world. His rhetorical point is that Norway's borders are not running next to Afghanistan. That is of course true. But it is equally true that most NATO members do not have a border to Russia along the Pasvik River in Northern Norway.

The Bear and Us - Russia and Norway

This week, the Norwegian foreign minister, mr Jonas Gahr Støre, held a speech on Russo-Norwegian relations at the Norwegian Insitute for Foreign Policy (NUPI). The main points in his speech was that the relationship between Norway and Russia has never been as good as now, but that it could and should get even better. Russia is on the right track, but the authoritarian tendencies are worrying. We do have a close dialogue with Russia, but we need to stay critical in our talks with our neighbor. But even though our relationship with Russia is improving, we are firmly rooted in the West and this will not change.

Mr Støre has proved himself as a great ambassador for Norway in capacity as foreign minister, and he deserves all the praise he gets for his job. He shows nuanced and well informed views, and he is not afraid of standing up for the Norwegian interests.

As he says, we need to have a good relationship with our eastern Neighbor, and we certainly do, at least on the "popular" level. This is especially true for the areas of Norway closest to the Russian border, such as Kirkenes, where even street signs are written both in Norwegian and Russian. But it also hold true for other parts. We do have a large Russian immigrant population, which is very well integrated. In some areas in Finnmark (northern Norway), Women with Russian background (mostly first-generation immigrants), make up almost 6% of the total female population in working age (Sør-Varanger 5.7% and Båtsfjord 5.8% in 2007). The male immigrant population is somewhat lower; on average it is 51% of the female one.

On the state-level (foreign policy), the relationship is good as well. We do have a good dialogue, and commercial and cultural exchange. But we do need to show some caution. The Russian state certainly is thumping its chest and showing some muscles, trying to build its reputation and self-esteem after the fall of the Soviet state. In is speech, Støre said that he has understanding for this. To a certain extent, I agree, but we should not accept the more worrying examples of this, such as the treatment Russia gave Ukraine and Georgia in 2007-2008, when it stopped exports of gas in the middle of the winter.

In the arctic area, we do have huge areas of sea where the border lines are not clearly drawn. With the recent findings of large oil and particularly gas fields here, this is an area of potential conflict with Russia. Little Norway do not want to get into a muscle-flexing contest with the Russian Bear here. So, as Støre pointed out, we need both to improve the already good relationship we have with Russia, as well as keep ourselves rooted in the West. A good relationship will minimize the risk of getting into some sort of conflict here, and being firmly rooted in the West (including NATO) will provide a deterrent as well as help if, in the future, we should need it - God forbid.

***

By the way, this is my 50th blog post, so I will allow myself a little congratulation. I started this blog last August, while I was living in Prague. Since then, I have more or less regularly been posting on various Norway-related subjects. I have certainly enjoyed it, and I will keep it going as long as I still do, which hopefully will be a long time. So, thanks for all the comments so far, and hopefully you will pop by as regularly as I post.

Russia, post or pre Putin..

One of the opinion pieces in the previous issue of The Economist, "Russia's Uneasy Handover", reflected upon the Putin legacy in Russia and the coming Medvedev-Putin regime.

As the article pointed out, "Mr Putin was lucky to inherit a recovering economy and an incipient oil- and commodity-price boom from Mr Yeltsin." In other words, Putin's perceived success lies not so much in his policies per se, but more in lucky circumstances.

If that is true, which it most certainly is, it is now the perfect time for Putin to stand back, and wait for better times before he again takes center stage in Russian politics. With a recession imminent, the Russian economy, which is very dependent on exports of commodities like oil and gas, will most certainly decline in the coming years.

Even though Putin most probably will be the de facto ruler of Russia, he is still in name only prime minister. Thus, it will be very easy for him, when better times come, to blame the Russian economic decline on the policies of Medvedev. Only a returned President Putin with unrestrained powers can get Russia back on track.

A grim prospect...