Fróðskaparrit - 01.01.2002, Blaðsíða 37

TÝDNINGURIN AV TVØRTJOÐA SAMSTARVI í NORÐURATLANTSØKINUM
35
tion. Since Sweden and Finland joined the
EU - and Norway did not - the role of
BEAR has been extended, as it is now not
only a bridge from the EU to Russia, but to
Norway as well.
The interests of the original West Nordic
Cooperation and the NORA have primarily
always been internal, developing coopera-
tion on infrastructure, for example. The Co-
operation has not been used to give the fish-
eries-dependent economies of the Faroe Is-
lands, Iceland, Greenland (and with NORA
also coastal Norway) a role in the global
economy. It was and still is essentially a
subdivision of Nordic Cooperation, histori-
cally a leftover from when around 1970 ne-
gotiations on the more ambitious
NORDEK cooperation, vis-á-vis the Euro-
pean Community (EC) failed, prior to the
Danish and the first Norwegian applica-
tions for EC membership.
New regionalism?
In contrast to 19th century nationalist poli-
cies, the new regionalism seen in recent re-
gional projects such as the Baltic Coopera-
tion is not oriented towards developing co-
operation by territories but to quite differ-
ent agenda such as cities, firms, universities
and social movements (Tunander, 1994:
37-38 and Joenniemi, 1994). In this sense,
size of territory or population has no rele-
vance compared to the potential for estab-
lishing networks and cooperation within
ecological, economic, social and political
fields. In principle, the fishing tradition of
the West Nordic countries should therefore
be a potential starting point for l'urther co-
operation and mutual efforts in resource
management, product development and in-
ternational marketing - but this is not the
case (as will be discussed in the next sec-
tion).
Meanwhile, West Nordic countries are
not included in the BEAR. Obviously, the
unsettled issues and ongoing conflicts
within the rich Barents Sea fisheries are
significant reasons for Norway to effective-
ly exclude the Barents Sea and the West
Nordic countries from the ‘Euro-Arctic’
Region. The conflict in the Barents Sea
fisheries are also obstacles to the develop-
ment of the new Nordic Atlantic Coopera-
lion, although this cooperation has no inter-
national ambitions for the present.
It is worth noting the necessity to be very
precise in discussions on regional coopera-
tion. Often political ambitions and projects
only exist on paper, while real cooperation
develops ‘from below’ - as fora and net-
works between individuals and business
partners. It is worthwhile distinguishing be-
tween regionalism as the policies of the na-
tion-states (or unified states) and regionali-
sation as the process of developing civil so-
cieties (Kákonen, 1996). With regard to he
BEAR, it could be asked whether or not it
is right to characterise this cooperation as
one of the new post-nationalist -forms, not
oriented towards territories and total popu-
lations but to cities, infrastructure and en-
terprises, as already mentioned. With a
strong commitment to Norwegian post-
Cold War policies, the BEAR may well be
seen as a necessary political vehicle to ad-
minister the vast differences in standards of
living between Russia and Norway (Tunan-
der, 1994: 34). The BEAR can also be com-