As the Nordic countries are increasingly facing common security challenges arising from the melting ice cap and the race for natural resources, the five governments are pondering on ways to pool resources and increase their collective security.

At the request of the Nordic governments, former Norwegian foreign minister Thorvald Stoltenberg has drafted a report tabling 13 proposals of practical cooperation in the civilian and military field. The five foreign ministers are set to discuss these proposals at a meeting in Reykjavik in April.

The last proposal, that of a “Nordic declaration of solidarity” bears some resemblance to NATO’s famous “Article 5”, stating that all members need to intervene when another member is under attack.

The Stoltenberg report states that the Nordic governments “should issue a mutual declaration of solidarity in which they commit themselves to clarifying how they would respond if a Nordic country were subject to external attack or undue pressure.”

Some voices already see in this the seeds of a potential “NATO of the North”.

Stefan Wallin, chairman of Finland’s Swedish People’s Party, said on March 13th that a military alliance of Nordic countries could be set up through a declaration of mutual solidarity. In his view, this last proposal was the most important of the Stoltenberg report.

-And it is not even very strange. We have a statement in the EU on support, so why shouldn’t we have that in the Nordic region, which remains politically, economically, and culturally our traditional reference group, Mr. Wallin said.

In line with existing obligations

However, as the author of the report himself pointed out, a solidarity clause “would complement, not replace, the Nordic countries’ existing foreign and security policy allegiances.”

- A joint declaration of this kind issued by the Nordic governments would make it possible to engage in far closer military cooperation than is the case today. Here I am assuming that the declaration would have to be made in a form that would ensure that it did not come in conflict with the Nordic countries’ existing UN, EU and NATO obligations. On the contrary, by facilitating close military cooperation, the declaration would help to strengthen the Nordic countries’ ability to fulfill their obligations and make resources available to these organisations, Mr. Stoltenberg explains.

Three of the Nordic countries are NATO members – Norway, Iceland and Denmark – while Finland and Sweden are EU members, along with Denmark.

Finland and Sweden have no intention in the foreseeable future to join NATO, although public opinion has become more favourable to this idea in recent times. Iceland, on the other hand, might be the fourth Nordic country to join the EU, due to the current economic crisis.

Yet Finland and Sweden do have a very active cooperation with NATO and even participate in the peacekeeping missions in Kosovo and Afghanistan. Both are part of NATO’s “Partnership for peace” framework, which they joined in 1994.

On the EU side, Denmark has opted out of the bloc’s security and defence policy, while non-EU member Norway has last year joined an EU battlegroup together with Sweden, Finland, Ireland and Estonia. This is a 2,800 strong stand-by unit designed for rapid deployment in a crisis.

Cooperation of Nordic countries with EU and NATO has best been summed up by Finnish foreign minister Alexander Stubb:

- In the world there are too many people who consider that security should be managed only by the EU, too many who think that security should be managed only by NATO and too many who think that security should be managed only by the Nordic states themselves. To me, all these three organisations live and coexist together. For me it's not an either or, it's all of the above, he told EUobserver after participating at a transatlantic dinner with NATO ministers in Brussels, on March 4th.

First Nordic NATO secretary general?

Denmark could also be the first Nordic country to send a NATO secretary general. As Jaap de Hoop Scheffer’s mandate reaches its end this summer, the military alliance has called on member states to put forward proposals for a successor.

The secretary general is NATO’s top representative, responsible for steering consultation and decision-making in the alliance. So far, NATO has only had European secretary generals, from Great Britain, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Belgium and Italy.

It is usually a former premier or foreign minister appointed for four years. Dutch Jaap de Hoop Scheffer’s mandate was extended by one year, so as to oversee NATO’s 60 anniversary summit in Strasbourg/Kehl on 2-4 April.

Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen is seen as the favourite candidate so far, although Turkey and Norway have some reserves, due to possible difficulties with Arab partners after the cartoon row in 2006.

But Norway also has its own potential candidate, foreign minister Jonas Gahr Stohre, who also made a good impression on NATO ambassadors. Mr Rasmussen, however, has a more senior position and the advantage of coming from a country which is a member of both NATO and the EU.

EU-NATO cooperation and more efficient planning and management of both civilian and military resources will be crucial for European and Nordic countries alike, as the economic crisis and shrinking defence budgets will not allow overlapping and waste.

Once France fully rejoins the military structures of NATO, the last stumbling block in the way of NATO-EU cooperation will remain the Turkish-Cypriot row over the status of the northern part of the island.

Yet many believe that with France fully onboard, this decade-long diplomatic war would not be able to impede practical cooperation between the two organisations, whose European members are mostly part of both.

Joint surveillance of the Arctic

Apart from the common security pledge, the Stoltenberg report also makes the case for joint satellite, air and maritime patrols to provide a common monitoring system for Nordic countries.

Currently, the Nordic maritime monitoring and early warning systems are lacking coordination and information exchange, with responsibilities being divided between several national institutions and no over-arching unit to pool this data.

This fragmentation is due both to national legislation, as well as to limitations of the computer systems employed in the five countries, the former Norwegian foreign minister argues.

Once set up, the common maritime surveillance system would allow Nordic countries to pool their vessels and icebreakers and to deploy coast guards and rescue services more effectively; especially as new shipping routes open up between the Atlantic and Pacific via the Arctic Ocean.

NATO-members Denmark, Iceland and Norway already have a joint military maritime surveillance system that produces common situation reports, and it is being upgraded.

The broader system envisaged now by the Stoltenberg report would not only pool information for the five Nordic nations but also allow rapid data-exchange with other nations involved in the region: Russia on the Barents Sea and the Baltic Sea; the other Baltic states on the Baltic Sea; and with Canada and the US on the North Atlantic.

Oslo has also started work on an integrated civilian system for monitoring of the Norwegian parts of the Barents Sea and Norwegian Sea.

The “BarentsWatch” would be developed during 2009–2016 and provide the possibility to integrate other national systems, as well as exchanging information with Canada, Russia and the US.

The Stoltenberg report encourages the other Nordic governments to join “BarentsWatch” rather than developing their own systems.

However, as the report points out, a common civilian monitoring system will only be truly effective if it can exchange data and coordinate with the military systems already in place to collect data on traffic and security threats.

This may be difficult to implement, not so much because Finland and Sweden are non-NATO members, but because of objections in some capitals to sharing NATO countries’ military information with Russia.

Even if the final form of security agreement between the Nordic countries would be much less than a “NATO of the North”, it is a widespread belief in Europe that it would serve as a model for any future regional cooperation amongst other EU and/or NATO members.

Innehållet i artikeln står för skribentens egen räkning