Fróðskaparrit - 01.01.2002, Page 38

36
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION
IN NORDIC ATLANTIC REGIONS
pared to the nationalist policy inherent in
the historical creation of Norway - i.e. as
one based on historical myths or legends. A
key person in the BEAR, a Deputy General
Director in the Norwegian Ministry of For-
eign Affairs, can be quoted on this:
“Nation states made use of history in the
last century to establish themselves, and
there is a strong similarity between the na-
tion-building of the 19th century and the re-
gion-building of today. The regions can
draw on historical events that were “forgot-
ten” during the nation-building process,
and that were suppressed during the Cold
War. The Barents project needs historical
symbols.” (Jervell, 1994: 10)
The existence of such an ambition is sup-
ported by the fact that the Norwegian Min-
istry of Foreign Affairs has funded research
on the 18th and 19th century “Pomor trade”
between Northern Norway and the White
Sea area and the production of thematic
(population, resources, environment) maps
of the Barents Region. Thereby the region
is constructed as a distinct territory with a
historical background. Due to this territori-
al approach to the Barents Region, the de-
velopment of some kind of mutual political
responsibility in the Region must be ex-
pected, such as securing a relatively equal
distribution of welfare, in the tradition of
Nordic nation-building. Such social and
political obligations are quite different
from the more narrow business networks,
as exist within fisheries, which are able to
develop with or without Barents Region in-
stitutions. To put the question succinctly: is
the purpose of the policy to secure stan-
dards of living in Northern Norway at the
high nationwide Norwegian level, or is the
purpose to secure equality between the in-
habitants of Northern Norway and the Mur-
mansk Region through the redistribution of
wealth? Of course, the answer should not
be one or the other, but both.
In any event, in order to understand the
concept of a “Europe of the Regions”, and
to discuss what it means in practice to the
fishing communities of the Nordic coun-
tries, it is necessary to reflect on the main
purpose, as well as the real content, of re-
gional cooperation. As will be shown, the
role of the nation-states - their political am-
bitions as well as their social obligations -
is still much more important than the pur-
suit of the idea of a “Europe of the Re-
gions” as a modern-day Hanseatic League,
with trading patterns similar to those of the
Middle Ages. It could be viewed as an ad-
vantage, but also a disadvantage that the
political elite of the modern Nordic nation-
al democratic states tend to interpret and
explain politics with reference to their own
national electorates (Icelandic, Danish/
Faeroese or Norwegian). Hence, the idea of
a new regionalism or regionalisation ‘from
below’ might be better suited to Non-
Nordic European countries where nation-
states (and welfare states) are weaker, re-
gional autonomy drives stronger (e.g. Italy,
Spain and United Kingdom), and cultures
are to some extent rnore heterogenous. Fac-
ing up to their position as a minority, sorne
Sami politicians have supported regionalist
ideas but this has not changed their position
as a minority with liltle say in the foreign
and transnational policies of the strong
Nordic nation-states.