Exhibit A in support of the main tasks of Scandinavian states in a world of the Leviathan:"Russian activity in the High North - The Arctic contest heats up
What is Russia up to in the seas above Europe?" The Economist, Oct. 9th 2008
What is Russia up to in the seas above Europe?" The Economist, Oct. 9th 2008
This is what happens when you allow grey areas of rules to fester - someone will take advantage of them being grey, and seeing what color they like in it. In this case, Russia is seeing the color of the high north in their own particular tint, and are enforcing their version of the rules, and is setting itself up to have a far greater say in it than in the past. Oslo carries much of the blame here, as successive governments have been woefully complacant about the possibility that someone would actually seriously challenge their interpretation of the rules, particularly concerning Svalbard, and must now pay the price in terms of a much more difficult environment to work in than they had only a few years ago.
The irony of the story is that Norway in fact has one of the more capable SysAdmin forces available in the region, its Coast Guard, which despite continuing rivalries with the "real" navy for resources and prominence continues to do an excellent job, but without legitimate rules to enforce, they can do little.
As for the tone in the Economist article, which seems to suggest that Norway now is considering this as a conventional security threat, I'd advice against it. This is no direct threat, it is simply a question of a vacuum needing to be filled. If Norway allows Russia to dictate under which circumstances that will happen, then Russia will most likely also dictate much of the final outcome. But if Norways would be more pro-active in trying to define these circumstances themselves, and deny the Russians the opportunity to militarize the situation, the outcome may be quite another one.
The irony of the story is that Norway in fact has one of the more capable SysAdmin forces available in the region, its Coast Guard, which despite continuing rivalries with the "real" navy for resources and prominence continues to do an excellent job, but without legitimate rules to enforce, they can do little.
As for the tone in the Economist article, which seems to suggest that Norway now is considering this as a conventional security threat, I'd advice against it. This is no direct threat, it is simply a question of a vacuum needing to be filled. If Norway allows Russia to dictate under which circumstances that will happen, then Russia will most likely also dictate much of the final outcome. But if Norways would be more pro-active in trying to define these circumstances themselves, and deny the Russians the opportunity to militarize the situation, the outcome may be quite another one.
No comments:
Post a Comment