– When we started looking at what we call Russian memory policy towards Norway, we were very surprised by some key findings, says professor of history at UiT Norway’s Arctic University, Kari Aga Myklebost. She points out that Russia has memorial alliances with Belarus and Serbia. This means that one agrees on the interpretation of the Second World War, and agrees on the interpretation of what is happening in Ukraine today. – It is very special that Norway has also tried to be used in this way. From the Norwegian side, they have not been aware of it, says Myklebost. This week she talked about the findings during the conference “What’s happening in the northern regions” in Tromsø. GEOPOLITICAL WINDS: During the violent storm in the north, professor of history at UiT Norway’s Arctic University Kari Aga Myklebost visits the conference “What is happening in the northern regions”. Here she tells how Russia uses its history with Norway to legitimize the current use of force in Ukraine. Photo: Eirik Hind Sveen / news Norway is drawn into the “alliance” Since Russia annexed the Krym peninsula in 2014, researchers have looked at how Norway’s ties with Russia in the north are viewed through the eyes of its neighbour. The findings are grim. From Russia, Norway, and especially the population in the north, is seen as a memory ally who understands and honors the important contribution of the Soviet Army during the Second World War. Thus, Norway can also be used as income for Russia’s fight against what they describe as neo-Nazism in Ukraine today. Since 2014, this has become increasingly aggressive. – Norway has been tried to be dragged into a memorial alliance with Russia without knowing it, says Myklebost. – Sensational Central to the Russian propaganda is the tradition Norway has had every year of marking the liberation of the Soviet Union together with the Russian Consulate General in Kirkenes. Sometimes the Russian foreign minister has also been present. Last year, the break came in full force. – When Sergej Lavrov has been to the liberation marches in Kirkenes, he has put forward the narrative that in Norway you understand Russia’s need to fight Nazism and neo-Nazism. After all, we have Quisling in Norway. We stand together in this fight, says Myklebost. Norway’s relationship with Russia in the north is a hot topic during the Nordic region conference in Tromsø this week. Photo: Eirik Hind Sveen / news She says that these have not just been individual comments from Lavrov in Kirkenes. This is the entire framework surrounding the Russian media coverage of the liberation marking in Kirkenes. Especially after the annexation of Krym, the commemorations with Norway have been used as an argument to legitimize the war in Ukraine. Myklebost believes that the Russian rhetoric has to a small extent been picked up in Norway. – It is quite surprising that we have not heard this better, myself included. I work with Russia, she says. Foreign Ministry: – Our view has changed Norwegian authorities must be and are on guard against Russian authorities wanting to exploit our shared war history in their propaganda. This is what state secretary Eivind Vad Petersson (Ap) in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs writes to news. – I agree that this important topic has received too little attention in the Norwegian public. At the same time, the brutal full-scale invasion has changed our view of today’s Russia, both in northern Norway and in the rest of the country. We now have a different awareness of how the Russian regime uses and abuses our common war history, he writes. State Secretary in the Foreign Ministry Eivind Vad Petersson agrees that the way Russia uses our common war history has been too little highlighted in Norway. Photo: ISMAIL BURAK AKKAN / news – Norway is drawn into the diplomatic game In Kirkenes there is a Norwegian-Soviet monument to honor the Red Army’s efforts in the liberation of Eastern Finnmark in October 1944. But while Russia has worked to draw Norway into a memory alliance, they have waged memory wars with several of their neighboring states in Eastern Europe. The explanation is simple. A number of countries experienced the Red Army standing through the Cold War, while from Eastern Finnmark they withdrew at the end of the war in 1945. Professor Stian Bones says that a problematic aspect of the Barents cooperation with Russia is that it is largely Norway and Russia alone that cooperates across the border in the north. Photo: Eirik Hind Sveen / news While Russia sees itself as liberators, many countries see the former Soviet Union as occupiers. While Russia has been in memory wars with a number of its neighboring countries, it has created a memory alliance with Norway. This is pointed out by professor of history Stian Bones at UiT, who also visited the conference in Tromsø this week. – From the Russian side, Norway is seen as a model country that understands the value of the fight against fascism. That we stood with the Soviet Union, and still stand with Russia. Norway is thus drawn into a diplomatic game that does not concern us, he says. That the Russian regime draws parallels between today’s Ukraine and the Nazis is an unheard of comparison, writes State Secretary Eivind Vad Petersson. – The memory policy as it is currently pursued by the Russian regime makes it difficult to have a common approach to our common war history. At the same time, it remains a historical fact that Soviet forces liberated and then left Eastern Finnmark. A Soviet soldier towers over the liberation monument in Kirkenes. Photo: Kristin Humstad / news – Using collaboration to influence Last year, Barents collaboration was 30 years old. Throughout these years, Norway had good contact with Russia across the border in the north. It concerned, among other things, education, research, trade and indigenous people. – From the Norwegian side, the Barents cooperation has mainly appeared as something apolitical that has nothing to do with security policy. Today, there is no doubt that part of the contact surfaces that have been established in the Barents cooperation have been used for Russian influence over the past few years, says Kari Aga Myklebost. Stian Bones points out that Norwegian politicians have wanted to stabilize relations with Russia through the collaboration. This has been seen as successful. – A problematic aspect of this is that it is largely Norway and Russia that have been the main players in the Barents cooperation. Thus, Russia as a major power and Norway as a small state have conducted this cooperation largely in isolation from others. This forms the basis for making contacts and influencing, he says. UD: – We did not succeed Regarding the Barents cooperation, State Secretary Eivind Vad Petersson says that it was “worth the attempt”. He points out that Norway worked for a long time to engage Russia in the broad international cooperation. This should also contribute positively to the internal development in Russia. – It was right for us to try, he writes. – But we did not succeed. This became clear to all when Russia launched a full-scale attack on Ukraine. Russia refused dialogue and chose offensive war instead. Naive? When asked whether Norway has been naive, the two professors at UiT answer as follows: – That the Russian narrative is closely linked to the security policy assessments, perhaps we should have seen earlier, says Myklebost. – It has been difficult to predict that Putin’s regime would develop in the direction it did. What you might question is that when you saw this development coming, you could have put in place more security measures earlier, says Bones.
ttn-69
Described as a memory ally – news Troms and Finnmark
