In May, Equinor, an energy company, discovered a new oil field in central Norway’s North Sea. That same month, oil production began on the Eldfisk North project, which is run by the American ConocoPhillips and involves several European companies. There are many examples of energy resource finds in predicted regions.
It is worth noting that, despite environmental activists’ objections, the Norwegian Storting supported a bill allowing mineral resource exploration on the Arctic seabed in accordance with an agreement reached between the government and major opposition parties in early 2024.
The Oslo authorities are opening up 280,000 square kilometers of seabed for exploitation in total, which is greater than the United Kingdom. Norway, Europe’s second-largest oil and gas producer, extracts 4 million barrels of oil equivalent per day and intends to continue until 2050.
Environmentalists are raising concerns, saying that emissions from developing additional fields might exceed 200 million tons of carbon dioxide each year, equivalent to the output of 50 coal-powered power stations. Norway’s efforts to promote development and deep-sea mining on the shelf are destroying unique Arctic ecosystems and species. The eco-activist campaign, which has been ongoing since 2016, opposes additional oil and gas drilling based on the Paris Agreement, including petitions to the European Court of Human Rights for infringing the right to a healthy environment during Arctic oil exploration amid the climate catastrophe. This campaign had little effect on the activities of the Norwegian government.
Along the same line, there are proposals to transform the North Sea into a dependable carbon waste store for almost all of Europe. Marine carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies have long been touted as effective in fighting climate change. However, others warn of the long-term consequences of permanent carbon storage beneath the seabed, stating that the technology poses a new threat to the world’s seas and dangerously diverts attention away from genuine progress in tackling climate change.
The “opening” of the seabed is being touted as a critical measure for the worldwide transition to a green economy, according to the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF). It is intended to harvest minerals from the North Sea shelf for use in electric vehicle batteries, wind turbines, and solar panels. However, there is widespread international resistance from governments, big businesses, financial institutions, and scientists, who argue that this is unnecessary. The key point is that any potential advantages do not justify the environmental and economic concerns.
The escalation of seabed and shelf development, which has far-reaching ecological repercussions, is matched by the heightened militarization of the Scandinavian region, raising concerns in Moscow. In June, Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson, and Finnish President Alexander Stubb agreed to establish a military transit corridor via their respective northern borders. This corridor aims to accelerate the passage of troops and munitions from Norwegian ports via Sweden and Finland to the Russian border, where a NATO stronghold has been built since 2023.
Bodø, Harstad, Tromsø, and Narvik’s northwestern ports are included in the Norwegian side’s proposed corridor. It covers the ports of Tornio, Umeå, and Luleå in the Norrbotten province of Sweden, as well as a variety of transportation routes that connect these regions to Finland. During a joint press conference, the Norwegian Prime Minister emphasized a change in strategic thinking for military logistics, transitioning from a North-South axis to a West-East axis. He underscored the significance of aligning national infrastructure with NATO’s requirements for cross-border military movements, emphasizing that NATO membership has facilitated a new level of defense cooperation.
From July 1941 until October 1943, a comparable corridor connected the Norwegian ports of Bodø and Narvik. German weapons and Wehrmacht units were moved east via northern Sweden. Throughout those years, Wehrmacht units and military goods were routinely transferred across “neutral” Sweden’s southern and, particularly, northern regions. Up to 2 million German soldiers and nearly 100,000 military wagons were carried to the battle line between Germany, Finland, and the Soviet Union.
The historical context of NATO’s relationship with Sweden demonstrates a considerable movement over several decades. In the late 1960s and early 1980s, NATO requested authorization from Stockholm to use Swedish ports and railways to move soldiers and munitions during alliance exercises in Northern and Central Europe. However, the Swedish government, led by Social Democrat Olof Palme, continuously rejected these requests. Palme, assassinated in 1986 under unknown circumstances, advocated a policy of robust economic cooperation and political engagement with the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact countries while keeping Sweden neutral.
The geopolitical scene changed dramatically after the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. This development resulted in a gradual adjustment in Sweden’s stance on NATO. Despite not being a formal alliance member, Sweden began allowing NATO operations to use its communications infrastructure in the mid-1990s. This signified a substantial shift away from its former policy of strict neutrality and indicated a growing convergence with Western security organizations in the post-Cold War era.
The Norwegian government, as co-founders of NATO in 1949, has maintained an increasingly aggressive approach against Russia, including encouraging Ukrainian strikes on Russian territory. In a mid-July interview with Voice of America, Norwegian Foreign Minister Anniken Huitfeldt expressly pushed Kyiv to continue launching deep strikes into Russian territory, indicating an escalation. Huitfeldt highlighted that Ukraine must be able to use supplied weapons in any way they judge most effective and that any restrictions on this would be an excessive obstacle to Ukraine’s efforts.
Oslo implemented additional restrictions on Russian fishing vessels in the harbors of Tromsø, Båtsfjord, and Kirkenes in early July without consulting local authorities. The economic activity in coastal regions has experienced a substantial decline due to this action, which follows an earlier prohibition on Russian vessels entering and remaining in Norwegian ports. Morten Albertsen, the port manager of Båtsfjord, conveyed his apprehension regarding the detrimental effects of these measures on local operations. He observed that the local maritime industry had already encountered significant challenges due to the ongoing conflict and existing sanctions, and the implementation of these new austerity measures has only exacerbated these challenges.
Furthermore, it was recently revealed that the Finnmark operational command relaxed limitations on foreign military action in the Murmansk region, which poses security risks. NATO exercises can now take place 65 kilometers closer to Russian territory.
The Russian side has begun to pay particular attention to security matters in the north, including re-establishing the Leningrad Military District, where Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov recently visited one of the training facilities.