Svalbard, Norwegian strategy in the Arctic, and Russia's Interests

At the turn of the twentieth--‐XXI centuries. increased interest in the archipelago of Spitsber--‐ gen (Svalbard) from national and international organizations, political and business circles, research organizations and the press. This is largely due to the growing interest of the international commu--‐ nity to the potential resources of the Arctic and the prospects of their development in the near fu--‐ ture. In this article, based on an analysis of open sources attempts to examine the implementation of modern Norwegian Arctic strategy from the viewpoint of the interests of Russia, near the archi--‐ pelago of Svalbard.

At the end of 2012 in the archipelago of Svalbard lived a total of about 2,700 people. Of the--‐ se, 471 people --‐ Barentsburg Russian citizens working in the mines of state trust "Arcticcoal." In the Norwegian settlements Longyearbyen and Ny--‐Alesund live permanently in 2090 and 40 people, respectively [13].

Norwegian management on the Archipelago

Since 1925 (since, as entered into force of the Treaty of Paris Spitsbergen) archipelago is part of the Kingdom of Norway --‐ province Svalbard (Svalbard). Law on the Status of Spitsbergen entered into force August 14, 1925 Norwegian interests are represented by the governor here. From 1925 to the present time, this post was held by 21 people. The Governor is the representative of the Government. He reports to the Ministry of Justice of Norway, but has the right to carry out orders and other Norwegian ministries. He exercises in the archipelago of the supreme legislative authority and is the chief of police, as well as head of the local Center rescue.

The office of the governor is a governing body of the province and is Svalbard (or functions that it performs) of three departments: police, environmental and administrative. In addition to the personnel office, the governor and have their own staff. The main problem to be solved by the ad--‐ ministrative staff Svalbard, formulated as follows: 1) the maintenance of Norwegian sovereignty over the archipelago; 2) the interests of the Norwegian State; 3) service for the good of the region. These general statements specified in the problems faced by the police department and the De--‐ partment of Environmental Protection.

On Svalbard acts the local government commune Longyearbyen. It is constructed on the model of self--‐government of mainland UK. Governments are elected every four years and are re--‐ sponsible for infrastructure, social and territorial planning, child care facilities. Taxation and medica care is not included in their competence.

About once a decade, the Norwegian Storting the Government submitted a message about the policy on Svalbard. This document defines the basic goals and policies of the kingdom. At the same time strengthen the position of the Norwegian archipelago is one of the basic provisions of the Oslo strategy put forward by strengthening its presence in the Arctic.Арктике.

Norwegians developed a program of the Northern Development, dubbed "Barents 2020". At the request of the politicians, the plan is a major determinant of Norway's arctic regions. Presenta--‐ tion of the project was held November 10, 2005 at the University of Tromsø. The report of the Norwegian Foreign Ministry №30 (2004--‐2005 gg.) To the Storting noted that Svalbard is a key target in the "high--‐latitude northern politics" of the kingdom, and the latter, in turn, will "take for a long period, the central place in Norwegian policy" [1, p.9]. It was pointed out in the Oslo Declaration "Soria Moria--‐I» and «Soria Moria--‐II», in the "Strategy of the Government of Norway for the devel--‐ opment of the northern regions" (2006), the white paper "New structural elements in the North" (2009) .

Norwegian Foreign Minister JG Støre defined the role of the North in the politics of his state: "The Nordic region is an important strategic priority for the Government of Norway in the interna--‐ tional politics, the foundations of which were laid in the declarations "Soria Moria--‐I" and "Soria Mo--‐ ria--‐II". "The strategy of the Government of Norway for the development of the northern regions" 2006 is the basic policies; in a subsequent paper "New structural elements in the north," 2009, the government presented the priorities and perspectives for 10--‐15 years. The Government's report to the Storting number 7 (2011--‐2012) "Northern regions --‐ perspectives and solutions" is a comprehen--‐ sive review of Norwegian policy in respect of the northern regions, where the focus is on the point of view of the Government of Norway on how Norway should solve complex problems and to use opportunities in the North in the future generations "[8, p.5]

Implementation of the planned strategy, including near Svalbard and adjacent waters (in the so--‐called "Spitsbergen square"), must, according to the developers, to ensure Norway a leading position in the field of scientific research of the North, a leading position in the world in the field of resource management of the North and its environment, ensure rapid economic development of the Northern Norway. And all of this is directly in contact with Russia's interests in the region --‐ the Western Arctic.

The main tool for the implementation of the Norwegian policy in the Arctic is the Interde--‐ partmental Commission on the polar regions. It was created back in 1965 as the Commission on Spitsbergen, then the scope of its activity has been expanded. Meetings of the Commission organ--‐ izes and conducts the Ministry of Justice and emergencies. It follows that this Ministry is responsi--‐ ble for the coordination of the government agencies and other organizations in the archipelago. The main method of this coordination is that all matters relating to affairs in the Svalbard previously discussed at a meeting of the Commission before the relevant ministry or agency will base its deci--‐ sion on the issue discussed. Commission decisions are advisory in nature, and in the event of disa--‐ greement between the Commission and the state structure decision is made at the discretion of the Norwegian Government.

The Norwegian archipelago is regulated by a number of state laws. The main of them is the "Law on Spitsbergen" (1925). He, in particular, specifies that the archipelago are Norwegian laws, unless otherwise notched. In this regard, there is always a potential threat to the international lega conflict: It is possible to argue that the regulation is the supreme disputes --‐ Norwegian laws or the Treaty of Paris on Spitsbergen. The reason for this threat is that the Paris Agreement is determined fundamental provisions of the international relations in the archipelago and were not reflected many of the specific issues that are relevant today for the conduct of economic activity in Svalbard and the adjacent sea areas. This, for example, the question of the shelf around the archipelago or the issue of the permanent residence of aliens in the territory of Svalbard. On the other hand, since the end of the twentieth century. Clearly, there is a tendency of the Norwegian authorities to ex--‐ tend the application of the laws in force in the continental part of the kingdom on the archipelago. In this case, the Norwegians had to reconcile the application of these laws with the provisions of the Treaty of Paris. Therefore, the application of these laws in the archipelago of the Norwegian side is done selectively.

It should be noted that with regard to the Treaty of Paris in 1920 for the Russian side there is another difficulty --‐ translation into Russian. The official text of the treaty is published in both French and English. Russian translation is unofficial. As shown by linguistic analysis, the Russian translation of a number of the serious inaccuracies, and sometimes mistakes are often significantly distort the interpretation of certain provisions [15]. In this regard, often encountered and there are serious differences between the Norwegian and Russian sides in the interpretation of the indi--‐ vidual fragments of the contract and their application in practice (for example, an item on the de--‐ militarization of the archipelago).

At the beginning of the XXI century. before the administration of Svalbard becomes more and more urgent to create a legal framework governing the presence of foreigners in Svalbard, since increases in the number of foreign nationals coming here for a long time, and the archipelago is not covered by the Norwegian continental "Aliens Act". Now Svalbard, not counting the Norwe--‐ gians and Russians, most of the foreigners living Swedes and Thais [6].

Svalbard has a separate tax legislation. Since 1925 the tax issues involved here Tax Board. Since 1998, its functions transferred to the tax office. Since the Treaty of Paris limits the collection of taxes in the archipelago, in Norway, together with the state budget approved by a separate budget for Svalbard, which is represented by the Ministry of Justice and emergencies. In this case, the past few years the state budget subsidies allocated Norway regularly for deficiency Svalbard budget.

Taxes on income in Svalbard is about 16% compared to almost 50% on the mainland. In re--‐ cent years, the Norwegian side is taking active efforts to change the tax system in the archipelago. Unfortunately, these conditions complicate the reform activities of participants in Svalbard Treaty of Paris, in the first place --‐ the Russians .

Taxation in the archipelago is carried out in two forms: full obligations and restrictions. Complete sets for those who stayed in the archipelago of more than 12 months. In this case, the taxpayer is required to pay local government tax on all their income and personal wealth from the date of entry in Svalbard. Limited duty exists for those living and working in the archipelago of less than 12 months (in this case charged only on Svalbard income tax) or less than 30 days at a time (in this case, all taxes levied in the home country of the taxpayer)[17]. In 2012, the administration of Svalbard has required that all Russians working on Spitsbergen or leading scientific activity there, pay taxes to the Norwegian treasury.

The main types of activities on the Norwegian Svalbard is currently a coal mining, research activities and tourism.

Most of the employed population of the Norwegian Svalbard engaged in coal mining. In the archipelago are several Norwegian mining companies, in some of which the state has a significant interest. The main concern is "Store Norske" the company "Kings Bay AS." These mines are unprof--‐ itable and coal companies to support the Norwegian government annually allocates considerable sums. It is expected that in the next few years, coal reserves at the mine "Svea Nord" will be ex--‐ hausted.

In addition to the economic difficulties faced by miners and environmental problems. In 2009, "Store Norske" has decided to close its mine №27, which pollute the coal dust and Bolter Val--‐ ley Advent, which created "difficulties for local travel agencies and dog kennels. The company's management has concluded that it can not appear as a "malicious pollutant" on Svalbard, so the mine was closed until further decision [4]. However, rolling coal production in the archipelago Nor--‐ wegians are not collected. In 2012, the company "Store Norske" started the construction of a road through the mountain glacier March Lunkeflel. There will be construction of a new mine, which by the way will transport equipment built mine "Svea". Coal reserves in the new area is estimated at 8.2 million. Tons of salable coal. The cost of opening the mine is estimated at 1 billion. NOK [12].

At the same time since 2009 conducted exploration on the west coast of Spitsbergen o.Zapadny in the Gulf of Saint--‐Dzhonsford for exploration stocks gold deposit. But the profitability of this field too early to speak .

Along with this, in the second decade of the XXI century. has experienced rapid growth in tourism. Leading Norwegian organization in this area is the company "Svalbard Reisel AU".

One of the trends in the development of the international cooperation in the area of Spits--‐ bergen square is to enhance the safety of navigation in the area. Part of this process is a collabora--‐ tion in the marine search and the rescue operations near Spitsbergen, which is enshrined in the 2011 signing of an agreement between Norway, Russia, USA, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Sweden. According to him, the Norwegian area of responsibility for these operations expanded in the east to the borders of the Russian zone, and in the north --‐ to the pole. In connection with this increasingly important administrative center of the archipelago of Svalbard --‐ Longyearbyen village --‐ as the basis for the search and rescue operations. This should enhance safety of navigation near the archipelago.

The preserving of the nature on Shpitzbergen

At the beginning of the XXI century. active work on giving Archipelago World Heritage sta--‐ tus. More and more attention has been paid to the preservation of the cultural monuments in Sval--‐ bard. It is important that a significant number of these monuments are industrial facilities (existing or canned).

Markedly increased in recent decades, and cooperation in the field of ecology. Co--‐deposited with the unique wildlife of Spitsbergen is one of the main objectives of the international communi--‐ ty. In 2007, the Fund was established to protect the environment in Svalbard. Currently, 57% of the archipelago are protected areas. These include: National Parks "Northwest Spitsbergen" (3560 square kilometers), "Forlani" (640 square kilometers), "South Spitsbergen" (5300 square kilome--‐ ters); 15 areas for the protection of birds; Reserves (to preserve the flora): "Moffen" (8 square kil--‐ ometers), "Northeast Shpitsber--‐gene" (19,030 square kilometers); "South--‐East Spitsbergen" (6450 sq. Km.).

Active steps in ensuring the protection of the natural environment of the archipelago from bliss--‐tive anthropogenic interference power Svalbard began in the 50s of the twentieth century. Now these efforts are increased. In this case, the Norwegian authorities rely on a solid legal frame--‐ work, a key element of which is the Norwegian Law "About the protection of the Environment on the Spitsbergen archipelago" (2001).

In 1995 there was a project to build a Norwegian transport route length of 67 km through the valley of the river. Reydallen to connect the two Norwegian village. In response, the ecologists from different countries, including and Norway, launched a violent campaign of protest. As a result of the Storting, the Norwegian government approved the proposal for the continued protection of the nature of Spitsbergen, in particular, wrote in his decision that "Svalbard is an important part of the last unspoilt nature of Norway and Europe with a unique quality of the environment and fragile ecosystems, agricultural land use which requires serious study. As part of an international treaty on Spitsbergen, Norway has a great responsibility for the fate of these fragile ecosystems. In case of conflict of interests on Svalbard different considerations of environmental protection should be decisive "[18]. In particular, the document noted that increasing tourism --‐ a challenge to controlled--‐ NIJ archipelago and should be regulated, as well as many other things, an appropriate management plan. Actual creation of new nature reserves in biologically pro--‐inductive areas of Svalbard. The

Government requested the establishment of a new concrete nature reserve on Bjørnøya (Bear Is--‐ land, one of the most important seabird islands of the Barents Sea, located halfway between Spits--‐ bergen and the mainland coast of Norway) Emphasized that the problem of natural reserves – is to protect undisturbed landscapes of the Arctic, to make the minimum impact of transport, in particu--‐ lar transport--‐related cruises. Supported the idea of charging for the approach to nature reserves, which will then be used for the needs of the management of these areas. With regard to manage--‐ ment outside protected areas, the plans Store Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani (Norwegian transport and supply company) to build a road and power line between Longirbyuenom and Sveagruva been rejected as a way of development, which is undoubtedly harmful to the environ--‐ ment and is in direct contradiction with the purpose of preservation the nature of Sval--‐ bard.Considered a failure export coal. It was proposed to supplement the Law on Environmenta Protection Svalbard special section regulating safety and wildlife conservation [18]. If the beginning of the XXI century. for active business were closed protected areas, accounted for more than half of the total area of Svalbard, after the adoption in 2001 of the Act became virtually closed for this and the rest of it.

Environmental activities Norwegians found strong support among the international organi--‐ zations of environmentalists, including and in Russia. Thus, in particular, appreciating the efforts of the Norwegian authorities in this area, information center "Living Arctic" in 1996, wrote: "It is par--‐ ticularly zealous Norwegian environmentalists relate to the Russian industry, causing it to act in accordance with Western environmental standards under strict control. The results are brilliant, and the Svalbard archipelago can serve as a standard of reasonable environmental management in most fragile ecosystems in the world – high arctic island, forcing envious sigh Russian ecologists and overflows with respect to their Norwegian colleagues' [16] .

Without denying the need to protect the nature of the archipelago, the Soviet / Russian side at the same time more than once pointed out that the desire of the Norwegian authorities for the protection of ecology is in fact a policy of restricting economic activities of participants of the Paris agreement. No one denies that the nature of Svalbard is very vulnerable and must be very carefu here to conduct business activities. But, as pointed out in 2007, the chairman of the Federation Council Committee for Northern Affairs and Indigenous People. G. D. Oleinik, "we can not help but worry that now markedly enhanced (or used as a provocative) the role of environmental factors in the emergence of modern conflicts" [10, p.8].

Like the other parties, in their protest Moscow has consistently stressed that many of the provisions of the Norwegian environmental laws with respect to conflict with the provisions of

Spitsbergen Treaty of Paris and the Mining Code in 1925 while noting elk, often environmenta measures Norwegians are flimsy and unsubstantiated, and the wording of the legislative acts very vague and open to the possibility of arbitrary government Svalbard their interpretation and applica--‐ tion. In particular, Russia has declared its opposition to the law "On Environmental Protection on Svalbard", adopted by the Storting June 5, 2001 Russian protest was expressed in the memorandum of November 4, 2001, directed the Norwegian side. This law replaced the previous notification pro--‐ cedure the Norwegian authorities on possible new developments minerals or other economic activ--‐ ity introduces licensing procedure for all economic activity in the archipelago. Political scientist I .A. Mihaylov about it said: "Norwegian Prime Minister assured the Russian leadership that the law would not affect the interests of Russia. Concern, however, the miners' Arcticugol", representatives of the Russian public is left. Some experts decision of the Norwegian legislators regarded as an at--‐ tempt under the guise of environmental activities start to oust Russia from Svalbard "[9].

Earlier, the Norwegian authorities to Soviet Foreign Ministry has repeatedly sent a docu--‐ ment expressing disagreement with the Norwegian environmental laws in the archipelago: memo--‐ randa of 22 December 1971 and 27 June 1972, and the statement of the Ambassador of the USSR in the Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway, dated July 2, 1973 .

The scientific research

To implement its strategy, the Norwegian government is based on the latest technology, which requires scientific knowledge about the region. In this regard, Norway established a fund regional studies, including funded research problems of the North and the Arctic. Svalbard created a center of international research in the area of the Norwegian settlements. But Russia is also inter--‐ ested in developing research in this area. This may give rise to contradictory situation: on the one hand, the Russians and Norwegians are competitors in scientific researches in the area of the archi--‐ pelago and on himself, on the other hand, joint efforts help to achieve greater scientific results. Thus, everything depends on what direction research activities will try to give the authorities of both countries: to use research to confront your neighbor or use them for the development of in--‐ teraction between neighboring countries to jointly address problems that are similar for both coun--‐ tries. Kchislu Such problems include issues of environmental safety, development of the natura resources in the Barents Sea, the social sector and others.

In recent years, we are working on the development of Svalbard as a platform for interna--‐ tional research. Development of scientific research and higher education remains one of the main priorities of the Norwegian activities on Svalbard. In Norway appreciates the possibility of the re--‐ search in the archipelago. On the one hand, there is a modern scientific infrastructure. From the

Norwegian side of the main base for this is the Polar Institute, located in Longyearbyen, research facilities in Ny--‐Ålesund and the University Center on Svalbard (UNIS, UNIS). UNIS is located in Long--‐ yearbyen, and a significant portion of its students are foreign nationals. The expansion of this cen--‐ ter is provided in the development plans of the Norwegian presence in Svalbard. In particular, in 2012 UNIS concluded a cooperation agreement with the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research, which is the largest Polar Research Institute in Norway [7].

On the other hand, on Svalbard has accumulated many years of experience in collaborative research scientists from different countries. Apart from Norway, here are the most active research Poland, Germany, France and Britain. In Ny--‐Ålesund is a permanent research stations of 10 coun--‐ tries (including Italy, Japan, South Korea, China and India), and the study on the archipelago are scientists about twenty countries. Research is carried out in the various fields of the science. In par--‐ ticular, the interest of the paleontologists finds fragments of fossil ichthyosaur made jointly by Polish scientists and members of the independent research organization SINTEF (SINTEF Petroleum Research). Traditionally, Svalbard is a place for active research glaciologists. Widely known creation of the World seed bank, located in one of the abandoned mine archipelago.

The most notable project in the field of scientific cooperation is the Integrated Observing System in Svalbard (CIOS, SEI). The goal of this project --‐ to fill the base of the observations that pro--‐ vide the basis for tbhe developing more sophisticated models of the Earth and improve climate predictions. As a result of the project will be provided by SEI getting close to real--‐time information on the changes in the Arctic for all stakeholders. Interest in the project showed scientific organiza--‐ tions from 17 countries.

Latent mitalirization of Norway and Northern territories

From a geopolitical point of view, Norway is an active participant in the military--‐political bloc of NATO and advocates for this reason that some sort of guide the interests of European countries and the USA in the Arctic. Russia, developing good--‐neighborly relations with Norway, cross--‐border cooperation, strategic partnership in the development of oil and gas fields, can not account for these and other aspects, especially in such a sensitive area, what are the national in--‐ terests in the field of defense --‐ said in his book Yu F.Lukin [19, p.241].

On Svalbard actively functioning satellite station "piled Sat", located in the district of Long--‐ yearbyen, missile range "piled Cancer", located near Ny--‐Ålesund, as well as radar for Atmospheric Research, owned by an international scientific organization EISCAT. There's also built Norwegian Observatory, which will be included in a network of nearly 25 observatories, which must work to--‐ gether to provide satellite infrastructure and climate monitoring in the Arctic. Spitsbergen Observa--‐ tory will supply data on climate, sea level rise, floods, landslides, earthquakes and melting ice. Its construction is due to start in 2013, and is the Norwegian government has allocated 29.5 million. EUR [14].

These objects cause increased attention of the Treaty of Paris, the CCA--‐particularly Russia, as they can be used for military purposes. But such use is prohibited Svalbard Treaty of Paris. The Norwegian party contested the term "demilitarization of the archipelago", believing that it is only in the agreement on the prohibition of creating Svalbard naval base and build there are no fortifica--‐ tions, which can be used in case of war. In such a situation inevitably escalates question regarding the interpretation of the strategic aspects of the status of Spitsbergen, enshrined in the Treaty of Paris. Therefore significantly increases the need for international cooperation in the above facilities.

This is true even in view of the fact that at the beginning of the XXI century. Oslo does not hide the fact that it would seek to strengthen its military presence in the northern seas. In Norway, believe that "the northern regions continue to pose a military--‐strategic interest, including the ar--‐ rangement of parts of the Russian nuclear forces and as a training area for important military air and naval units. Norway has been in NATO for the alliance once again drew attention to their sur--‐ rounding areas --‐ including those located in the North "[3, p.22].

This is confirmed by the fact that the overall operational management of the Norwegian Armed Forces moved to the North, in the city of Bodø. Also to the North, in the town of Sortland, moved and the Department of the Coast Guard. In 2005, the Norwegian Coast Guard was allocated an additional 44 million. Crowns, which were intended "to increase the time of service and gain control functions"[5]. To help the coast guard were also transferred reconnaissance aircraft "Ori--‐ on".

Norwegians reinforce its military presence off the coast of Svalbard. According to the deci--‐ sion of the Storting every year since 2012, here will be sent to one of the largest ships of the Nor--‐ wegian Navy. The main task – is to demonstrate the Norwegian presence in Svalbard and the sur--‐ rounding waters. In 2012, the mission carried out the newest Norwegian frigate "Thor Heyerdahl". Captain P.Rustad commented on this campaign in an interview "AvisaNordland":"In Bodø based two F--‐16 fighter, which is tasked with ensuring Norwegian interests in the Far North. We will train with them, as well as air reconnaissance aircraft patrolling the area "[11]. These actions Oslo may not cause for concern in Moscow about the prospects of Russian interests in the area of Svalbard.

Geopolitical interests of Russia in Shpitsbergen

Russia is very interested in strict compliance with the conditions of the Treaty of Paris, and maintaining its presence in the archipelago. Firstly, Svalbard is not the last place in the strategic planning of NATO, Norway --‐ active participants. Therefore, the displacement of the Russians on the archipelago will allow NATO command more actively expand its activity in the area, depriving Mos--‐ cow's ability to effectively monitor compliance with the Treaty of Paris that limit the military pres--‐ ence on Svalbard. Secondly, it is our country, along with the Norwegians the most actively engaged in economic activity in the archipelago and in its waters. And the international competition for the resources of the Arctic Ocean, including and aquatic resources, is steadily increasing.

Officially, the Norwegian side stands for the development of cooperation with Russia in the area of Svalbard. November 12, 2002 in a joint statement by the President and the Prime Minister of Norway, it was said that "the Norwegian side welcomes the continuation of Russian economic activity on Svalbard as a natural and important part of the overall activity in the archipelago, as well as new types of such activity" [20, p .68--‐69]. This statement is an undeniable force in the in--‐ ternational law and of fundamental importance for the Russian presence on the archipelago in terms of mutual understanding and cooperation with Norway as it is done in a joint Russian--‐ Norwegian document at the highest level. You can find some examples of the fact that the Rus--‐ sian--‐Norwegian cooperation in the area of the square and the Spitsbergen archipelago at the con--‐ tinuing and growing in various fields. This applies, in particular, joint activities of military and bor--‐ der structures of Russia and Norway in the Barents Sea (eg, regular Russian--‐Norwegian scientist "Pomorie").

Overall, however, the Russian--‐Norwegian relations in the area of Spitsbergen give more cause for concern than for calm. In practice for a long time since the late 50--‐ies. The twentieth century., traced desire Oslo gradually squeezed from Svalbard to Norway the most dangerous competitors, while strengthening and expanding its sovereignty here. The country's authorities introduced restrictive environmental regulations, stricter rules and other fisheries management measures Arctic territories. In particular, recently is led ban on the use of Spitsbergen square of heavy fuel oil. First of all, these efforts Norwegians affect the interests of Russia.

Consultant, Department of National Security Strategy and Research Department of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation pointed V. V. Schipalov fol--‐ lowing main areas of counter Norway provisions of the Treaty of Paris: the gradual restriction of independent foreign economic, primarily mining, and scientific activities on the archipelago; estab--‐ lish unilateral control over the surrounding Spitsbergen waters and shelf without special interna--‐ tional situation of the archipelago; attempts to change the status of Svalbard as a demilitarized area; refusal to review the legal status of Spitsbergen on a bilateral or multilateral basis, indicating that attempts to achieve the sole competence of Norway in status and other issues on Svalbard and around it; purposeful distortion of the meaning of certain provisions of the Treaty of Paris in the Norwegian legal literature and speeches of officials to substantiate and justify such a line "[20, p.70--‐71].

If Norway joins the EU, the question of revising the Treaty of Paris on Spitsbergen can get on the agenda, as on the territory of the kingdom will dominate the legislative requirements and standards of the EU. Talking about such a possibility, V. V. Schipalov notes: "In the long term (after 2010) due to changes in the international legal status of the archipelago may be jeopardized wide range of Russia's strategic interests in the region directly archipelago, and the North Atlantic and arctic--‐sky directions. In particular, there will be a real threat to free exit of Russia in the North At--‐ lantic, the additional costs when using the passing of Spitzbergen sea and air routes, possible mili--‐ tarization of the archipelago "[20, p.68]. "In the long term (after 2010) due to changes in the inter--‐ national legal status of the archipelago may be jeopardized wide range of Russia's strategic inter--‐ ests in the region directly archipelago, and the North Atlantic and Arctic areas. In particular, there will be a real threat to free exit of Russia in the North Atlantic, the additional costs when using the passing of Spitzbergen sea and air routes, possible militarization of the archipelago "[20, p.68].

In this regard, the issue of further strengthening the Russian presence on the archipelago has a pronounced geopolitical and strategic importance. At the beginning of the second decade of the XXI century, the actions of the Norwegian side in the area of Spitsbergen seen increased pres--‐ sure on the Russians. In particular, it is shown that the Norwegian side clearly avoids solving bilat--‐ eral Russian--‐Norwegian controversial issues in the region, attracting to the dispute other members of the Paris agreement on Spitsbergen or international organizations (EU, NATO). Priority is given explicitly in Oslo cooperation within the framework of such international organizations as the Arctic Council, the Northern Dimension of the European Union, and the like. At the same time a noticea--‐ ble tendency to a number of states, who are far from the Barents Sea and other polar seas, to par--‐ ticipate in a variety of the natural resource development projects in the polar regions. Russia is preferable to resolve disputed issues in the Barents Sea area on a bilateral basis as countries having priority in the development of the North. With regard to the Barents Sea this priority are Norway and Russia.

All clearly reveals the geopolitical ambitions of Norway in the Arctic, designed to increase the status and image creation Arctic regional super powers increases its activity on mezhdunarod--‐ noy̆ arena. On January 19--‐20, 2011 in London went Northern--‐Europe summit at which leaders of nine countries --‐ the UK, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania --‐ discussed the strengthening of the cooperation, as well as the idea of creating the North "mini

NATO". The conceptual basis for the newly created Nordic Covenant is Thorvald Stoltenberg report "Nordic Cooperation on Foreign and Security Policy». Arctic thrust generated by a military unit is not in doubt. T. Stoltenberg himself admits that the idea of a Scandinavian mini--‐NATO --‐ is a re--‐ sponse to Russian efforts on surveying and exploration of the Arctic shelf and natural resources under it [19, p.248--‐250].

Conclusion

The most important geopolitical step towards a peaceful redistribution of Arctic sea space and strengthening of bilateral relations is the Treaty between Russia and Norway, in force since 2011. However, conducted by Professor Y. F. Lukin SWOT--‐analysis of the strengths and weakness--‐ es of the agreement, opportunities and threats shows that this document does not permit perma--‐ nentnoy̆ konflikt situation around Svalbard, disagreements between the parties on Maritime De--‐ limitation, openly violates Parizhskiy̆ agreement on Svalbard in 1920. Contract blurs internationa pravovoystatus Spitsbergen, which can lead to the actual position of the Russian Federation disa--‐ vowal of non--‐recognition set unilaterally by Norway's 200--‐mile fishery protection zone around Svalbard, prejudice the legal status of polar domains of Russia, established back in 1926, and to create conditions for the displacement national fisheries of the western areas of the Barents sea and Svalbard area [19, p.231--‐232].

According to the professor (University) L.S.Voronkova, the Russian side in relations with Norway often acts driven partner, not enough focused on meeting the national interests of Russia [2]. And with this statement is hard to disagree. Unnecessarily long for several years delayed the development of the "Strategy of the Russian presence on Spitsbergen until 2020", the develop--‐ ment of which began in the late 90s. The twentieth century. When it became obvious that Russia is losing its position in the archipelago and its surrounding waters, and ended only in 2012. But the implementation of this strategy requires great effort on the part of the Russian authorities, since it is carried out in the face of fierce competition with Norwegian claims to leadership in the Arctic. Very clearly, these questions were made during the visit of former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Norway 1--‐2 June 2012. It was opened, real moment of truth" without masks and diplo--‐ matic hypocrisy. Tromso was announced then stolitsey̆ the Arctic, and the US --‐ the leading state in the Arctic.

Carried out in the Article historical analysis revealed the main directions and mechanisms of Norwegian policy in the area of Spitsbergen (Svalbard) at the beginning of the XXI century and quite clearly define Russia's interests in the region that has a great geopolitical importance in the further development of Russian--‐Norwegian relations.