“What is this ruin of yours?

The devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads"

(Prof. Preobrazhensky, Heart of a Dog, M. Bulgakov)

All the same, Russia is an amazing country. Maybe someday our L. Carroll will appear and write about our Masha in Wonderland. Well, what the mind does not understand, everyone knows. Understand others, but not us. Because we are special. And do not measure with a yardstick. The country is large and spacious. But there are a few things that are absolutely incomprehensible to me personally, even if you look from the side. Although they say that it is more visible from the outside. No, it's not visible.

I have the impression that all of our new story it's kind of like a pendulum. Or, if you prefer, a swing. On which all the people sway from side to side with a very high amplitude, intensity, childish naivety and gullibility that nothing bad will happen. Why? So it's the Pope who rocks us, he is big, strong, he loves and protects us. Fun, breathtaking, chill in the stomach and a little scary and interesting. Let me explain. Let's squint kindly, like Vladimir Ilyich at walkers, and look at our history over the past 100 years until now.

We had two fathers of the revolution of 1917, Vladimir Ilyich and Lev Davydovich. Everyone has already forgotten, but Lev Davydovich was in certain time even more popular than V.I. Lenin. He was the demon of the revolution, the leader and tribune. And the whole revolutionary people loved him very much.

And then bam! They drove him out of the USSR and instead of a demon he became a prostitute. Just some werewolf. The swing swung sharply in the other direction and they began to brand him at all meetings, in newspapers, etc.

We were friends in 1939-early 1941 with Germany. Stalin to Ribbentrop: „ Thank you, Mr. Minister, for your congratulations. Friendship of the peoples of Germany and Soviet Union, sealed with blood, has every reason to be durable and strong. The people, of course, too. Then, from June 1941, they stopped being friends with them, they turned out to be treacherous fascists, and the people went to the front. Pendulum popular opinion again swung in the opposite direction. Fascists they are fascists, but why did they hang noodles on the ears of the people since 1939 about “fraternal Germany”. And he believed everything.

JV Stalin was the father of the people and the winner in the Second World War. The people not only loved him, but simply adored and idolized him. And I couldn't imagine life without him. And then bam again! He turned out " bloody tyrant”, etc. Why is that? And the new Pope, N.S. Khrushchev, said so. And we began to brand the tyrant with all the people. The swing went the other way.

Then the people were told that the past Pope was a bit of a voluntarist and not only said a lot of nonsense, but also did it. Back again. Does our great Soviet-Russian people have a head that is completely absent? Does he have his own opinion? Or is he just very obedient and does not want to upset his power? Or maybe everyone who still had brains and the will to resist the authorities was knocked out over the years Soviet power and WWII? After all, nothing changes in the mind of the people. Just not sure what to think

I won't bore you with history. About Gorbachev, Yeltsin, etc. The last one. In 1989, a world-class political scientist and a great friend of Russia Z. Brzezinski came to us. It was still the USSR. And he gave our elitists a lecture at the Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He spoke about the strategic backwardness of the USSR, the inevitable collapse of the administrative-command system, etc. And now the listeners, who had served this system for decades and swore eternal love and fidelity, saw him off with a standing ovation and prolonged stormy applause. I can imagine M.A. Suslov's virtual visit to Yale University and a similar speech. Yes, after the first words, they would be thrown out not only from the university, but also from the country. When the same Brzezinski, 22 years later, came to the forum in Yaroslavl in 2011 to look at his handiwork in the collapse of the country, President Dmitry Medvedev greeted him with tears in his eyes: Thank you, sir, for not forgetting us orphans. Z. Brzezinski looked at him without expression or smile and probably thought: I know the city will be, I know the garden will bloom (in the USA) when there are such people in the Soviet country.

Well, well, then our current Dad swung where he needed to swing. Or do you think that this stupid and gullible dad of ours entrusted someone else's Dad to swing the swing, to whom all these other people's kids are on the swing on the side. Let him even crash from the swing. It’s somehow a little doubtful, well, isn’t it quite the same as our current Pope drank his brains? And why did the idiots themselves climb onto the swing? After all, you can fall from them. Are V.Pareto and MLH right in a recent article on the site? The first one called the aforementioned children on the swings a mass and believed that they were nobody, there was no way to call them, and in general even to talk about them was a waste of time. Many people read the MLH article, some were offended, but in essence it is not very different from Pareto.

Since all of the above is directly related to the following, let's start.

There are two countries, Russia and Norway, both northern, i.e. not very fertile, in general it is impossible to compare in size, as well as in terms of population size. They have almost 30 times less. But we have one common feature, and a very significant one, which determines almost everything in our countries at the present time. This is a rental type of economy based on the export of hydrocarbons and products of their processing. Contribution of oil and gas to GDP Russia is about 30%, in budget revenues - about 50%, in the volume Russian export about two-thirds, and share sales of oil and gas in budget revenues and GDP have been growing in recent years. In Norway, hydrocarbons account for about 52-53% of exports.

Below I will give one table compiled by me on the basis of open data, they are easily verified. All data in the table refer to 2016, sometimes 2017, unless otherwise noted.

All data in the table are given in billions of US dollars, unless otherwise indicated.

Parameters Russia Norway

GDP 3800 PPP - 6th in the world

281 at no. – 12th place 376 at face value

GDP growth 2014 0.7%

2015 2.5%↓

2016 0.2%↓ 0.8%

2017 1.5%

GDP per capita 26490 USD PPP - 46th place 71497 USD - nom

8929 USD nom - 67th place

Inflation 3% 3.5%

Economically active population 76.5 million 2.8 million

Unemployment rate 4.9% 4.3%

Population below the poverty line 16.5% 2.3%, cf. In the EU - 9%

Keep in mind different concepts of poverty

Number of billionaires, 2017 96 10, no commodities

Human Development Index No. 49 in the world No. 1 in the world

Life expectancy, years:

Total 70.1 81.6

Men 62 80.2

Women 76.3 83.6

Child mortality 6.9/1000 2.5/1000

activity (number of articles in rec-

certified editions, incl. in

world. rate system) No. 15 - 14150 No. 27 -4777

Export 285.49 92.4

Import 183.6 73.02

Public debt about 212 - 17.8% of GDP 124 -33% of GDP

External debt 532.8 609

State. Income 470 199.8

The amount of the National Wealth Fund as of September 1, 2017 92.4 1000

Oil production, million tons about 554 90

Average mining cost

USD/barrel about 18 about 30

As you can see, with a similar type of economy, there is a huge, simply monstrous difference in general in everything.

Norway. Even 40-50 years ago it was one of the poorest European countries with a large flow of migrants to neighboring countries and the United States. It had no independence for almost 600 years and was ruled by both Danes and Swedes, and it became independent just over 100 years ago. And today it is the undisputed world leader (see table) in terms of living standards, human development index, level of education, etc. And they do not want to be members of the EU. How did they achieve this? Yes, unexpected wealth fell on them in the late 60s in the form of discovered oil fields on the shelf of the North Sea. How they work true democracy see briefly here: http://www.naslednick.ru/articles/travel/travel_97.html. This has nothing to do with the structure of power in the Russian Federation. I don't mean that their ministers don't have flashing lights and a cavalcade of security jeeps and go to work on foot or by bike. Look, there's a little something else.

Comparison. Well, now let's compare to understand why such a monstrous difference. In general, about the structure of the Norwegian economy and its oil industry, see Wikipedia.

Their GDP is 8 times greater.

The population is below the poverty line. We have 2 times more than the average in the EU, they have 4 times less.

We have 95 billionaires, they have 10 and none of the commodity business. Those. their billionaires are from the business of innovation, not raw materials.

Number of scientific publications high level they have only 3 times less than ours. And their population is almost 30 times smaller

The size of the NWF - they have 1,000 billion, we have 92. Although our annual oil production is 554 million tons, and theirs is 90. Our cost of production is about 18, theirs is about 30. Where is Zin's money?

"In the first half of the 1980sIn order to weaken the political weight of the state company Statoil, but to maintain the presence of the state in the industry, Norway has introduced a new form of ownership - the state's direct share in the fields and pipeline system (SDFI). Revenues from the sale of SDFI oil and gas began to go directly to the state budget, and therefore were not subject to taxation.” And not in Rosneft, Gazprom, etc.

« In order to maintain a high standard of living for the population after the inevitable depletion of oil reserves, the Norwegian Oil Fund was created. (NNF is some analogue of our Reserve Fund and NWF.) In 2017, its size reached $1,000 billion.”

What can Norway do with its NSF?

State Pension Fund(sovereign investment fund) of Norway for the first half of 2017 earned 499 billion crowns ($63.2 billion according to current exchange rate). This is a record half-year result for the entire 20-year history of the investment fund (Norwegian central bank).

The volume of assets under management of the fund for the first time exceeded $1 trillion, amounting to 8.02 trillion kroons as of June 30, 2017, or $1.017 trillion. This means that there is now $191,000 for every Norwegian citizen.

The maximum yield was shown by investments in shares - 9.09%. The second result was shown by real estate - 2.69% yield, the third - by bonds with 1.9%. The total interest yield in the half year amounted to 6.5%.

Borrowings from NSF are legally limited to 3%, previously it was 4%.

Any expenses of the state - only from the investment profit of the Fund. As of 2017, it provides about 50% of the fund's income, i.e. more than oil rent (45%)

The investment income of the fund is very actively invested in the diversification of the country's economy: the defense industry, high technology, shipbuilding, etc. The export of high-tech goods and weapons from Norway is growing at a very high pace, and not only to NATO countries. Already in 2016, the share of such goods amounted to 19.5% of all exports (weapons were about 1 billion in 2017). For example, in Russia it is about 5%.

What are we doing with our RF and NWF?

Firstly, the Russian Federation is no more and you can forget about it.

The National Welfare Fund was created to guarantee the payment of pensions to citizens of the Russian Federation in the event of a fall in energy prices.

Why is it, though slowly, but falling?

Why are the funds from this fund not making any profit?

Why targeted spending from this fund, i.e. on pensions of citizens, do not exceed 5 billion rubles a year or less than 1% of the funds?

Everything is very simple. There are no laws and the government draws funds from this fund for its own needs. What are these needs?

Investing in stupid and dubious state and near-state projects such as: Ukrainian or other debts, state projects, the Olympics, the World Cup 2018, Crimeanash, bank assets, etc. We probably just don’t know a lot. According to V. Nazarov from the NIFI of the Ministry of Finance, the illiquid assets of the NWF account for about 35%. This is all from your future pensions, dear Russians.

If you, dear readers, after viewing this table, still continue to believe that the “insidious abroad”, and not our own government and ourselves, who allow it to be like this, are to blame for all our troubles, then I wish you to continue swinging on your favorite swing in the hope that life will get better. It won't. And worse, completely.

First of all, it is necessary to start with the fact that the foundations of relations between Norway and Russia are laid down by history and geography. Geographically, Norway stretches for 2,650 km along the western and northern coasts of Scandinavia, its territory adjacent to this coast is 325,000 sq. km, and also includes the Svalbard archipelago with Bear Island, located approximately between 74 and 81 degrees northern latitude and constituting approximately 6300 sq. km, and the Jan Mayen peninsula with an area of ​​380 sq. km, located between Iceland and Greenland. In addition, Norway has declared sovereignty over Queen Maud Land in Antarctica, over Peter I Island off the west coast of Antarctica, and over Bouvet Island, located between South Africa and Antarctica outside the scope of the Antarctic Treaty.

The land border between Norway and Russia is no more than 196 km. However, this is the oldest and most stable Russian border, which has always been the border of the world. For centuries, the territories in the Far North were not sufficiently populated, and the main concerns of the country were reduced to the collection of taxes on the fur trade. For almost all the centuries, the territories in the North were not delimited, and the overlapping claims of the kings of Norway and Sweden and the Russian tsars were combined with the tolerant approach of all interested parties, with the possible exception of taxpayers, whose opinion no one was interested in.

After the delimitation in 1751 of the border between Sweden (which included Finland) and Norway, the status of the remaining northernmost section, where the Norwegian territory adjoins the Russian, was determined by the Treaty of 1826. Since then, this contract has not been amended. The peace in the area was broken only twice: in 1941, when German troops attacked Russia, and in 1944, when the Red Army crossed the border to drive off the occupying army and liberate eastern Finnmark - the northernmost region of Norway.

Russian-Norwegian border in North Kallot (established in 1826) during Russian Empire was the only direct border of Russia with a Western European state, without a "buffer zone" from Eastern or Central European countries. In the notes of Russian travelers of the late 19th century, it was repeatedly noted that the contrast between Russia and the West is felt on the Russian-Norwegian border more than anywhere else. However, relations with Norway, both at the interstate and interpersonal level, have been surprisingly amicable. This is most likely due to special historical conditions: Pomeranian trade flourished in the 19th century. Every summer 300-400 Russian ships went to Northern Norway to change fish from the Saami and Norwegians. In return, they brought grain and wood products, which were in short supply in Northern Norway. The Pomeranian trade gave rise to its own pidgin language - the so-called "Russenorsk" with a simplified grammar and a limited vocabulary. Russenorsk differs significantly from other pidgin languages ​​in Asia and Africa, where vocabulary developed on the basis of the language of the metropolis - English, French or Dutch. Russenorsk has an approximately equal number of Russian and Norwegian words, which indicates that Russians and Norwegians were socially equal partners.

At the state level, relations between Russia and Norway have not escaped controversy. So, for example, there was a stable Swedish-Norwegian idea of ​​the Russian threat to Norway. There was a corresponding belief in certain circles in Russia that there was a "Norwegian threat" to Northern Russia in the form of economic Norwegian expansion to the north. The basis for this was the active fishing and commercial activities of Norwegians in Russian territorial waters and the beginning of Norwegian colonization on the coast of Murman. However, these contradictions did not lead to insoluble conflicts. The "Norwegian threat" to Northern Russia was clearly exaggerated, and Russian government did not take this idea seriously.

The "Russian threat", on the other hand, was taken seriously by political and military circles in Sweden and Norway, especially in Sweden. Relations between Sweden and Russia were historically more tense, and in the 19th century the "Russian threat" was actively used in the struggle to preserve union state Sweden-Norway. The Swedish side argued that if Norway left the union, then Russia would take the opportunity to get ice-free ports in Northern Norway. In Norway, it was increasingly understood that the Swedes were using the "Russian threat" to keep the Norwegians in the alliance, and without sufficient reason. Fear of Russia began to decline, and this contributed to a more realistic view of things, especially since historical research confirms that the Russian Empire had no plans to expand at the expense of Norway.

At the same time, it is quite clear that the collapse of the Swedish-Norwegian union state was in the interests of Russia's foreign policy. Russian authorities warily followed the so-called pro-German orientation of the Swedish-Norwegian foreign policy. The collapse of the union state would lead to a weakening of the pro-German direction and would reduce the possibility of a future neutral Scandinavian defensive or neutral association, which could increase the risk of closing the Danish straits for Russian military ships, which, in turn, would have Negative consequences for Russia in case of war. All these circumstances largely contributed to the fact that on October 29, 1905, Russia was the first of the European superpowers to recognize the "new Norway" as an independent state.

An important element of our relationship is
Arctic orientation of both countries. Over time, it changed, and the routes of Norwegian and Russian fishing, sealing and hunting, sealing and whale hunting moved. By 1870, there was mostly Norwegian activity in the Svalbard archipelago, and it became necessary to ensure law and order on these islands, which were considered not under the jurisdiction of any country (no man's land). Between 1871 and World War I, Norway raised the issue of establishing orderly power in front of Russia and in front of a wider range of states, but no solution was reached.

The Versailles Peace Conference decided to place the archipelago under the "full and absolute sovereignty of Norway" "in accordance with the terms" of the Svalbard Treaty of February 9, 1920.

The terms of this agreement mainly provide for the equality of ships and citizens of the participating countries in terms of fishing and hunting, mining and other profitable activities on land and in territorial waters, as well as restrictions on taxation. Further, Norway pledged to refrain from establishing or permitting the establishment of any naval base or the building of defensive fortifications in this archipelago "which can never be used for military purposes."

Russia made a concession in regulating the ownership of Svalbard by the treaty, and in 1925 Norway entered into administration of this territory as an integral part of the kingdom under the ancient name of Svalbard. Russia joined the treaty in 1935.

By this time, a Russian coal company was already operating on the territory of the archipelago. Arktikugol.

In 1944, the Soviet government proposed changing the status of Svalbard, requesting that Bear Island be ceded to its jurisdiction and proposing that Norway and the USSR jointly manage the rest of the territory as a condominium. After careful study, Norway rejected this proposal, and Moscow no longer returned to its initiative to revise the 1920 Treaty. However, this initiative had a long-term effect: from now on, Norway considered various offers or the arguments put forward by the Soviet side, with an eye to it. The Norwegians sincerely feared the possibility of a new attempt to question the foundations of Norwegian sovereignty over the archipelago or gain unilateral advantages for "Arktikugol" in comparison with other states-participants of the agreement.

In the early 1970s, oil exploration on Svalbard acquired priority interest from Arktikugol and from Norwegian and Western oil companies. At the same time, environmental considerations gave rise to plans to create national parks, nature protection zones and the adoption of general measures to protect the environment. Svalbard was no longer a distant point in the Arctic, but part of modern Norway, which caused growing public attention to it. The local administration received additional resources, and the governor of the archipelago extended his authority throughout its territory. New demands from the administration were perceived "Arktikugol" as interference in its activities, which led to numerous frictions. For the most part, these difficulties are irrelevant today.

Another discussion continues. In Norway's view, the provisions of the 1920 Treaty should be interpreted strictly in their text. The rights granted to the parties to the treaty and their companies stem from the specific terms of the treaty, that is, they relate to the land and territorial waters around the islands. Thus, these rights do not extend to the continental shelf or beyond the territorial sea. This is in line with the traditional canons of the tract vykki agreements provided for by international pr avom at the time when the treaty was concluded in 1920, and at the time of the accession of the Soviet Union to it. Russia has recorded its disagreement with the Norwegian approach both in relation to continental shelf, and in relation to the fish protection zone around Svalbard introduced in 1977. Other parties to the 1920 Treaty are of a similar opinion or reserve their position.

With regard to fisheries, close cooperation between Norway and Russia has made it possible in practice to overcome differences in the interpretation of the treaty. As far as the continental shelf is concerned, Norway assumes that, in practical terms, the Svalbard Mining Code is completely unsuitable for offshore production and that oil companies will ultimately prefer to operate under the protection of the legal regime that applies to the Norwegian continental shelf as a whole.

Norwegian and Russian settlements on Svalbard continue to maintain harmonious relations. Contacts between them are frequent and spontaneous. When tragedy strikes, as happened in August 1996 when a Russian passenger plane crashed near Longyearbyen, the sense of unity amid isolation and hardship is deep and strong. During the rescue and evacuation operations, as well as during the hard work of identifying the bodies of the dead, the Norwegian, Russian, as well as Ukrainian authorities were able to work in close cooperation.

Norway repaid the rapid recognition of its independence by Russia in 1905 by becoming one of the first Western countries to recognize after October revolution Soviet government in 1924 as the legitimate government of Russia, and was also one of the first countries to recognize the independence of the Russian Federation in 1991. The period between these events is characterized by the belonging of the two countries to different ideological camps, and later by the conditions " cold war”, which imposed many restrictions on the development of bilateral relations

Norway's economic activity in Russia is associated with great risk and big problems. Such problems include the following:

- public administration is ineffective,

— legal and legal framework, including tax law, too unstable,

- public administration and law enforcement apparatus only to a small extent inspire confidence and guarantee legal protection,

- Inflation can rise significantly

- the market functions too poorly in conditions when the old system of commodity exchange is disintegrating,

- the banking system, in terms of servicing settlements and providing loans, is poorly developed,

- there is a shortage of own capital,

- too underdeveloped public services and infrastructure

- there are big differences between Western and Eastern ideas about entrepreneurial activity,

- there are contradictions in the competence and ambiguity as to who is the owner of the resources - republics or regions, etc.

For the Norwegian side, there are also additional difficulties associated with the traditional orientation of the economy towards the West. Given the current situation, cooperation with Russia requires long-term preparation and deep knowledge local conditions. It is necessary to increase the level of knowledge of political, economic, linguistic and cultural ties from the Norwegian participants of economic activities and government bodies.

One of the real touchstones in the development of Barents cooperation will be the removal of barriers to trade in the region and work to stimulate trade and economic cooperation. It's not just about earning major projects cooperation between central and regional public authorities, but about providing economic ties and human contacts with opportunities and space for development.

There are big differences between Russian and Norwegian laws and regulations and it is necessary to accumulate knowledge and understanding legal systems each other. There is also a lot of work to be done in terms of expanding the network of agreements on permits, visas, invitations to work, etc. It is necessary to develop reasonable solutions regarding the health of Norwegians in Russia and Russians in Norway, the functioning of rescue services, insurance and other things.

In general, the above problems that Norwegian entrepreneurs face in Russia make their activity difficult, costly and risky. Norwegian authorities through the Action Program for of Eastern Europe allocated relatively large sums of money. Priority is given to projects in Northwestern Russia.

Geographically, the territories of Norway and Russia form the coast Barents Sea, located between their adjacent areas of continental land, the Norwegian archipelago of Svalbard (Spitsbergen), the Russian archipelagos of Franz Josef Land and Novaya Zemlya. Russian fishermen usually fished off the Norwegian coast, and merchants called at Norwegian ports to exchange fish for grain and flour (this practice became known as "Pomor" trade, and even a special dialect was used here, consisting of elements of Germanic, Norwegian and Russian languages) .

Norwegian seal, whale and animal hunters organized expeditions to Svalbard and eastern part the Barents Sea, as well as to Franz Josef Land and New Earth. Starting from the end of the 17th century, Russian hunters from the majestic northern monasteries sailed to Svalbard, but these expeditions then became the rarest and completely stopped in mid-nineteenth century. At the end of the same century, settlers from Norway, in the hope of a better life, began to settle in the rarest villages on the coast of the Kola Peninsula - the Russian authorities welcomed this fact as an opportunity to strengthen the economy of this sparsely populated area.

The geographic factor also means that both Norway and Russia had strategic interests tied to their overlapping territories. These strategic interests are impartially different, since Russia is - and will remain - a great power with large human and natural resources, a significant conventional military force, and one of the most impressive strategic nuclear capabilities in the world. Norway, on the other hand, is a small country, neither willing nor able to carry out any military policy outside its own borders. Adhering to the fundamental principle of a peaceful approach to international relations, Norway maintains a modest military structure dedicated solely to self-defence and to participation in international peacekeeping and humanitarian assistance operations.

In the period between the establishment of Finland's independence and the beginning of the 2nd World War, there was no tension in the border areas between Norway, Finland and Russia. After the war, the situation changed: Finland lost Petsamo, and Norway and Russia again began to border on each other; the unity of the allies during the war was replaced by confrontation and the state of the cold war; Norway became one of the founding countries of NATO; with the creation of a nuclear weapon and the expansion of the Soviet Northern Fleet The Kola Peninsula has become the base of one of the world's strongest navies and the location of a large arsenal of nuclear weapons, as well as the storage of a mass of spent nuclear fuel from warships and icebreakers and other nuclear waste.

Norway contributed to efforts to reduce tensions by adopting a policy of limited autonomous deterrence regarding military activity on Norwegian territory: already in February 1949, that is, even before the country joined NATO, the Norwegian government informed the Soviet Union that it did not will become a party to any contract that would include an obligation on the part of Norway to establish bases for the armed forces of foreign countries, unless Norway becomes the object of attack or the danger of attack. Norway later declared that, under the same conditions, nuclear weapons would not be placed on Norwegian territory. Norway also has a policy that NATO military and air exercises should not take place closer than five hundred kilometers from Russian territory and that excludes the movement of foreign military units near the border. In connection with the end of the Cold War, these restrictions have been modified to a certain extent, but their main provisions have been preserved.

Discussions are ongoing between Russia and NATO member countries on the future configuration of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and on forms of cooperation between NATO and Russia.

2. STATUS OF MODERN RELATIONS OF NORWAY WITH RUSSIA

Norway and Russia often meet face to face, but contacts at a broad international level and international regional cooperation also play important role. Cooperation in the Barents region enjoys a special priority for Norway. Norway and Russia also cooperate within the framework of international organizations. Current examples are NATO, where Norway is actively involved in the alliance's cooperation program with Russia, and the United Nations, especially during the Norwegian Security Council membership in 2001-2002. Russia is important partner both in the Council of Europe and in the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).

Council of States Baltic Sea – Norway and Russia take an active part in cooperation within the framework of the Council of the Baltic Sea States together with other states of the region. Norwegian priority areas are energy, economic cooperation, democracy development, health and public safety.

Northern Dimension of the European Union - c The purpose of this cooperation is to strengthen ties between the European Union and the Nordic countries that are not currently part of the Union, including Norway and Russia. Norway, among other things, pays great attention in this regard to cooperation in the field of environmental protection and nuclear safety.

Arctic Council - h The members of the organization are the Nordic countries, the USA, Canada, Russia and representatives of indigenous peoples. The purpose of the Council is to implement and coordinate cooperation between Arctic countries especially in the field of environmental protection and sustainable development.

Nordic Council of Ministers - R The development of democracy in the northern region is the main topic of cooperation here. Within the framework of the organization, a fund has also been established to finance environmental projects within the framework of cooperation in the Barents Region and the Council of the Baltic Sea States.

Active neighborhood - with 1992 Norway supports the democratic transformation in Russia and the transition to a market economy through annual allocations through the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the implementation of Russian-Norwegian cooperation projects. The allocation is NOK 100-150 million per year. Many of the areas mentioned in this brochure, such as health care, the environment and culture, receive funds from this budget. Specific examples of joint projects include the fight against tuberculosis, veterinary cooperation in fish farming, the development of ecologically clean ways production in industry, cooperation in the field of execution of sentences (places of detention), cooperation at the level of administrative-territorial units, construction of energy-saving centers, cooperation in the field of science, women's conferences and seminars for journalists.

In the reform process that Russia has been in since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the implementation of these projects has contributed to building an independent civil society. For example, the establishment in Russia of functional system health and systems social security covering all segments of the population.

Cooperation within various projects also contributed to the establishment of a network of contacts that did not exist 10 years ago. Today, there are close Russian-Norwegian ties at all levels, from authorities to interpersonal contacts. The border, which was hermetically sealed in the recent past, is today crossed in both directions by a large number of Norwegians and Russians engaged in various types of bilateral cooperation. Active activity- a normal phenomenon for neighboring peoples.

In 2003, the turnover of Russian-Norwegian trade exceeded $1 billion. In 2004, the trade turnover exceeded $1.5 billion. In 2004, the volume of Russian exports to Norway increased by 17.4%. and compared with 2003 and amounted to 861 million dollars. In 2006, the volume of Russian exports amounted to 726 million dollars, imports - 323 million dollars.

In the Norwegian trade turnover, the share of Russian goods is about 1.5%.

The volume of trade turnover between Russia and Norway in 2006 amounted to 2 billion 117 million US dollars (an increase of 28.5% compared to 2004), doubling the volume of trade turnover in 2002, which is explained by mainly by the growth in deliveries to the Norwegian market in recent years of chemical products, petroleum products, non-ferrous metals, machinery and equipment, finished products.

Export of goods to Norway in 2006 amounted to 1 billion 297 million US dollars (an increase of 13.8% compared to 2005), having exceeded the level of 2003 by 1.8 times.

In the structure of Russian exports to Norway, there are mainly primary processed raw materials, chemical products, and non-ferrous metals.

The structure of Russian exports is dominated by non-ferrous metallurgy products, which account for 40%. This is followed by fish and seafood (20%) and crude oil (10%). In recent years, in the structure of exports, there has been an increase in the export of high-tech equipment. Thus, following the results of 2006, this growth amounted to 42%.

Fisheries emerge as a central area for the implementation of cooperation projects. In the structure of imports from Norway, 70% of the turnover falls on fish and seafood.

Large deliveries of Russian cod by Norwegian fisheries companies to fish processing enterprises made it possible to establish between them important connections. Norwegian companies have great experience also in regard to the supply of equipment for the fishing fleet, as well as in other areas of production. The reorganization in Russia of the former state-owned fisheries companies and collective farms has pushed the Norwegian and Russian sides to a very gratifying and beneficial cooperation for both sides.

In 2006, the export of fresh salmon increased by 22.6 million kroons and reached the level of 40 million kroons. total cost trout exports amounted to 15.9 million kroons, which is 10 million kroons more.

Energy is another area that is marked by dynamism and in which the Norwegian economy is particularly perverse. As you know, Russia is experiencing a great need to develop its energy sector in order to achieve greater efficiency production. There is a large untapped potential in the oil and gas industry in northwest Russia, which will require significant expertise, investments and supplies of equipment. There are also major challenges in the field of power supply, making markets more efficient, technical improvement and energy savings.

Norway has a very competitive offshore industry. This applies to enterprises in the field of both shipping and shipbuilding, as well as the supply of equipment, and research. There must be a good basis for economic cooperation between these industries of the two countries.

In 2006 practically for all groups of goods (except for food products and non-food raw materials) Russian exports to Norway significantly exceeded the volumes of 2005. For such items as engineering products, vehicles and equipment, growth in 2006 compared to 2005 amounted to 15.8%, and various finished products - by 18%. .3%. Non-commodity exports of Russian products in 2006 amounted to 434 million US dollars, an increase of 44.7% compared to 2005, including the growth of machinery, equipment and vehicles amounted to 115.2%.

In 2006, on orders from Norwegian shipowners, Sevmash continued construction of 8 special courts for the transportation of chemical and hazardous substances, at the Volgograd shipyard - three cargo ships. In addition, the construction of 2 icebreakers began at the Baltic Shipyard (St. Petersburg). The Norwegian company Aker Kverner will supply special equipment for completing icebreakers in the amount of $6.5 million.

Imports from Norway increased by 61% and amounted to USD 820 mln. total volume imports amounted to 70.3%).

The positive balance in favor of Russia amounted to 476.4 million US dollars.

The proximity of Norway to the north-west of Russia, the similarity of climatic and soil conditions create favorable prerequisites for the development of cooperation in the field of Agriculture. The agro-industrial complex of Northern Norway has experience that can be very useful for northwestern Russia, for example, with regard to the processing, processing and distribution of agricultural products.

Norwegian companies are well positioned in important sectors such as construction, mining and mineral extraction, and not least in computer science.

The strength of the Norwegian economy is its ability to combine many functions in separate industries, which have a kind of enterprise complexes that complement each other in production, service, financing, insurance, marketing, research and development. The Norwegian economy, with such complexes, especially in the fields of energy, fisheries, shipping, shipbuilding, metallurgy and wood processing, has a particularly advantageous starting position in terms of constructively promoting transformation and making the Russian economy more efficient.

Today, 130 Norwegian companies are successfully operating in Russia. He noted that for many of them, Russia is a "land of opportunity." The value of promising cooperation projects for the next three years is estimated at $1-1.2 billion.

Currently, Russia is cooperating with Norway in various areas. And although in the crisis year of 2009 the trade turnover between Russia and Norway has seriously decreased (by 21%), in 2010 there is an increase (almost 50%).

One of the main areas of modern relations between Russia and Norway is energy. The main energy project is the development of the Shtokman field in the Barents Sea. The gas will be jointly produced by Norwegian Statoil, French Total and Russian Gazprom.

Norway is interested in deposits in Yamal and seeks economic cooperation with the Russian company LUKOIL on the markets of third countries.

In April 2010, during the visit of the President of Russia D.A. Medvedev to Norway managed for the first time in 30 years to agree on the general parameters of fishing in the Barents Sea.

As a result of the visit, a Joint Statement and 8 intergovernmental agreements in the field of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, education and science, ecology, as well as cooperation in law enforcement structures were signed.

In addition, the following agreements were established.

Firstly, Russians living in a 30-kilometer zone along the Russian-Norwegian border will be able to visit Norway without issuing visas.

Secondly, Norway and Russia decided to define maritime boundaries in the Barents Sea for the first time in 40 years. The disputed territories (175 square kilometers) are divided into two equal parts. This is a problem that complicated Russian-Norwegian relations.

The principles were determined according to which Russia and Norway will jointly use the Barents Sea: do not interfere with each other, share space and cooperate.

Currently, military cooperation between Russia and Norway continues. For example, in Bergen on June 4, 2010, the Norwegian-Russian exercise Pomor 2010 started. For the first time since 1994, the Russian and Norwegian armed forces will hold such a large-scale exercise.

The purpose of the exercise will be the joint development of solutions common tasks in the western polar region. From the Norwegian side, the frigate Otto Sverdrup, the ship coast guard Nordkapp, P3C coastal patrol aircraft and F-16 fighters. From the Russian side, the Severomorsk BOD, Il-38 anti-submarine patrol aircraft and SU-33 fighters will take part. Together, the vessels will cover the distance from Bergen to Severomorsk, during the voyage there will be boarding team exercises, signals exercises, search and rescue exercises and shooting exercises. The exercises will demonstrate the possibilities of cooperation between the Russian and Norwegian armed forces in carrying out mission-solving operations in the northern regions.

Russia and Norway are the largest producers and exporters of oil and gas in Europe, and are among the largest suppliers of oil and gas in the world.

The Norwegian authorities are in contact with Russia in the energy sector, mainly for the following purposes:

— to strengthen and develop dialogue in the field of energy policy;

— achieve the creation of clear, stable and predictable framework conditions for activities, the prerequisite of which is the protection of the environment;

— focus on the investment climate in the energy sector and common interests countries in international issues of the electric power industry;

— protect the interests of Norwegian oil companies and Norwegian suppliers;

- highlight the benefits international participation in oil and gas activities;

— to develop cooperation in the field of pre-emergency preparedness in the oil industry.

Norway and Russia have a common plan for pre-emergency preparedness and conduct joint exercises to prevent oil pollution in the Barents Sea. The Russian authorities are invited to contribute to the work of an overall resource management plan with overall consideration of the environment, fisheries, oil activities and maritime transport. Environmental observation and mapping are also important tasks.

3. PROSPECTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIONS BETWEEN NORWAY AND RUSSIA

Northern European region last decade against the backdrop of rapid general changes on the European continent, differs relatively a high degree stability. Accordingly, the border of Russia in the northwest remains the most calm. This is largely the result of the constructive and balanced policy of most of the Nordic countries, their sincere desire to interact with the Russian Federation on a wide range of issues.

The states of this region today by themselves practically pose neither a military nor an economic threat to Russia's interests. In recent years, in these countries, the fears and negative moods that previously had regarding the USSR have almost disappeared. In many ways, this is the merit of those politicians in the countries of the North of Europe who understood the need to finally abandon the approaches of the times of bloc confrontation. With all the countries of the North of Europe there is a modern contractual framework that meets the mutual interests of the parties.

Within the framework of cooperation with the Nordic countries, cooperation in energy sector. First of all, steps should be taken to attract additional investment in the oil and gas sector for the development, in particular, of the Kharyaginskoye field and the Timan-Pechersk project.

The development of the Shtokman gas condensate field in the Barents Sea, carried out by Gazprom jointly with the Norwegian Norsk Hydro and other companies, requires special attention. Both Russia and Norway stand to gain significantly in the long run if gas takes a more significant position in the European energy market. Both countries are also objectively interested in coordinating pricing policies in the energy sector.

The idea of ​​creating technopolises in the border areas focused on the development of new promising technologies in the field of telecommunications and communications deserves careful consideration.

A qualitatively new arrangement of the Russian-Finnish border along its entire length (1300 km), which is at the same time the border with European Union, as well as borders with Norway, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland, including, in particular, the opening of new, modern checkpoints, should make it possible to significantly activate economic ties and unite into a single economic space with serious potential, the territory from the Barents to the Baltic Sea.

The situation with Norway as a member of NATO sharing a border with Russia and considered (as before) an important element of NATO's military strategy towards Russia is more complicated. Norway's renunciation of the obligation to prevent military activity involving foreign troops east of the 24th meridian in the region of Finnmark cannot contribute to the strengthening of security and confidence. As a result, under the guise of activities within the framework of the Partnership for Peace program, military exercises began to be held directly at the border of the Russian Federation. Russia's decision to refrain from participating in the Barents Peace 99 exercise was a logical political move.

Russia is justifiably concerned about the operational use of a multifunctional radar station moved from the United States to the Norwegian village of Varde, which can be used to detect and reconnaissance launches of Russian land-based and sea-based ballistic missiles. It is clear that this station is considered by the US military leadership as important element in construction plans new system PRO.

The intensive deployment of stations for monitoring the space situation and intercepting information from artificial satellites Lands on Svalbard, as well as plans to deploy powerful means of radar and electronic surveillance, control and communications in the archipelago by 2002. Russia cannot but be concerned that in the event the United States withdraws from the ABM Treaty, these facilities will become an essential element in America's creation of its own national missile defense system.
HISTORY OF NATURAL SCIENCE 2014-08-15

Not everyone knows, and many have not even heard that in 2011 Russia gave Norway just so huge territories in the Barents Sea.

We are talking about the transfer of Norway (a NATO country, by the way) 90 thousand square kilometers water areas(formally, it is more correct to say water areas, not territories, but this does not change the essence - the state gives up the territory) Barents Sea with the richest deposits of oil, gas and fish resources. For comparison, the total area Leningrad region less (83.9 thousand sq. km).

In terms of the area transferred to Norway, these are six Kaliningrad regions. This is approximately two Moscow regions or two Ryazan regions. This is the area of ​​the Leningrad or Chelyabinsk regions.

In reality, Russia has lost even more areas (the transfer of these territories entails Russia's waiver of rights to another 240,000 sq. km areas of the Arctic in the Svalbard region. At least that's how it will be interpreted and presented foreign diplomats), but more on that later.

The territorial dispute over territories in the Barents Sea with Norway has been going on for a long time, since the days of the Soviet Union - since the 1970s. But the President of the Russian Federation (at that time D.A. Medvedev), as the famous security guard Borodach used to say, in 2010 made himself a warning shot in the thigh. That is, he cut the "Gordian knot" of contradictions, simply giving all the disputed territories to Norway. We do not know whether Medvedev made the decision alone, or whether it was the decision of the "elite", which Medvedev simply carried out.

The procedure was carried out quickly enough and imperceptibly for the population of the country. Imperceptibly - we mean Russia. But Norway noted National holiday on this occasion.

September 15, 2010 Russia and Norway signed the Treaty on the delimitation of maritime spaces in the Barents Sea and the North Arctic Ocean.

Russia ratified this treaty by Federal Law No. 57-FZ of April 5, 2011 “On Ratification of the Treaty between the Russian Federation and the Kingdom of Norway on the Delimitation of Maritime Spaces and Cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean” (adopted by the State Duma on March 25, 2011, approved Federation Council on March 30, 2011).

Our State Duma approved the ratification of the agreement by 311 votes against 57. So a fairly large number of people from the so-called "elite" are directly related to this decision. Does this "elite" only defend the interests of the state? And if he defends it, people, within the framework of a constructive dialogue, want to know the true reasons on the basis of which the territories were ceded to another country. In the end, some of the deputies voted against - they also had their own arguments.

Interestingly, the ratification passed, one might say, under the heading "secret". For the first time in recent years, the central media did not report on an event of this magnitude. More precisely, there was information, but it had a completely different character - something like "about the agreements reached with Norway on the disputed territories."

The Minister of Petroleum and Energy of Norway, Ulu Burten Mue, commented enthusiastically on the "great news".

“The presented exploration results prove that the south-east of the Barents Sea is the most interesting of the new areas of the Norwegian continental shelf,” the minister is quoted by the Barents Observer.

In the given territories of the Barents Sea, which was ceded to the Norwegians, they found hydrocarbons worth 30 billion euros. This follows from the report of the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD). In total, in the bowels of the territory that ceded to Norway, hydrocarbon deposits are estimated at 300 million cubic meters - in oil equivalent, this is almost 1.9 billion barrels. According to forecasts, the approximate volume of minerals may turn out to be even more - 565 million cubic meters, of which oil accounts for at least 15%, the NPD report says.

As for the history of the territorial dispute in the Barents Sea, at one time the USSR and Norway put forward fundamentally different proposals for establishing the boundaries of economic zones and shelf properties in the Barents Sea.

Norway demanded partition along the line equal distances between the coasts of the two countries. This is a frequently encountered partition principle, which, however, is not universal. After all, one of the countries can gain a decisive advantage in the division simply due to the protruding cape or peninsula. This is exactly the case in the Barents Sea, where the Norwegian coast "hangs" over the Russian one. Therefore, this principle is often corrected by taking into account the length and population of the coast.

The Soviet Union came up with a proposal to draw a dividing line along the border of the polar sector of the USSR, established back in 1926. This polar sector, which is still recognized today, means that Russia does not belong to the sea, but only to the land located inside this sector (including land that can be opened or rise above the sea surface as a result of tectonic processes - which, taking into account recent geological changes, is quite possible ).

Before the transfer of territories, about 60% of the total Russian catch of fish and seafood in the Barents Sea was caught in areas that the new treaty gave under the jurisdiction of Norway. The richest deposits of oil and gas were also located there.

And we are talking not just about the transfer of territory, resource rich, another NATO member country. If the Nazis during the Second World War were able to reach the oil-bearing regions of the Caucasus, the losses of the USSR would have been much greater.

It's not even about money and resources. Although in them too. Now the submarines of the NATO countries with nuclear weapons on board (and Norway is a member of NATO) will legally be closer to the territory of Russia. Now NATO gets more possibilities tracking our submarines - at least with the help of submarine cables, at least in another way. It is still unknown what happened to the Kursk submarine in those parts in 2000...

In a possible war, the score will go not even for seconds, but for fractions of seconds, which can decide everything when missiles approach. We hope it never comes to that.

In fact, there is every reason to believe that it will not come to this - but simply because it is more profitable to simply “squeeze” the same territories from Russia without resorting to an open armed clash. The goal is achieved with fewer losses, fewer resources, etc. Why fight if they themselves will give everything away, without a war?

Norway claims today in total on 2.4 million sq. km of water areas in the World Ocean in the form of its economic zone. In terms of area, this is slightly smaller than Kazakhstan, these are large territorial claims. Other countries are not far behind. The redistribution of the world has been going on for a long time. There is no place for Russia on the new world map.

We don't want to believe that chain reaction the surrender of territories by Russia has already begun ...

At one time, Russia (more precisely, the USSR in 1990 by Gorbachev and Shevardnadze) had already done (46.3 thousand square kilometers); not so long ago (in 2008), Tarabarov Island and part of Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island on the Amur were transferred to China. There is every reason to believe that this is not the latest news about the surrender of territories ...

And by the way, unlike our State Duma, in 1990 the Supreme Soviet of the USSR did not ratify the agreement on the transfer of the Bering Sea shelf to the Americans. There used to be more people with state thinking in power, probably ...

We will write more about this later.

With the poverty of its own population, Russia shows unheard of generosity to other countries. We are not even talking here about how many debts Russia has forgiven other countries for nothing - we wrote about this in.

When concluding a new agreement with Norway in 2010, we retreated to the east from the borders of Russia's polar possessions, which are not only enshrined in our legislation, but also marked on almost all foreign geographical and navigational maps.

Leonid Kalashnikov, First Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs, called the agreement on the division of the Barents Sea "shameful."

As we wrote above, the ratification of this treaty may entail other, more serious consequences.

The ratification of this treaty also means waiver of rights in the territory, which Russia has as a member Paris Treaty 1920 across Svalbard. At least I'll scream about it Western countries after a certain number of years, and the next round of "spinning" will begin.

This is an area of ​​about 240 thousand square kilometers. And this is more than five times the area of ​​the Moscow region. Three times more than the Leningrad region or the Tver region. 1.7 times the area Murmansk region. This is approximately if the area of ​​the Yaroslavl region is added to the area of ​​Karelia in double size.

No matter how the initiators, supporters and lobbyists (write other words yourself) of this treaty with Norway dodge that by ratifying the treaty we do not recognize Norway's right to the maritime space around Svalbard, in fact, everything is not so rosy. Yes, the issue remains controversial, but it is no coincidence that the 1920 Svalbard Treaty is not mentioned at all in the new 2010 treaty on the delimitation of maritime spaces in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean. This is a gross and most likely deliberate violation of technology. international treaties, which always confirms the loyalty of the parties to previous agreements that have a related subject of regulation. The signing of the 2010 treaty will greatly complicate Russia's position on Svalbard in the future.

And Norway is actually already hosting Svalbard.

If our authorities and diplomats lose in a 100% winning dispute, they are unlikely to be able to win an international court in which there is at least one legal hook for the other side of the dispute. At the transfer of Russia to Norway 90 thousand square meters. km of the Barents Sea one could at least negotiate some preferential terms for Russia in cooperation - for example, on the joint extraction of resources, one could force Norway to make reciprocal concessions on the same Svalbard, agree on a demilitarized zone, etc. etc. Well, or leave the situation as it is as a last resort until better times.

None of this was done. And in general - why was it necessary to give away their territories?

I just want to say in the words of Milyukov P.N.: “What is this - stupidity or treason?” ...

We do not blame anyone indiscriminately, without knowing, perhaps, some nuances - but we see the facts. We just want to ask and understand why Russia did it. In the end, the sharp condemnation of this agreement by a number of deputies was also not based on an empty place ...

You may be interested in the following articles:

Hello!

Interfax is starting a test broadcast of the 1/4 final match of the Olympic hockey tournament between the national teams of Russia and Norway!

The composition of the Russian team for the match with Norway

The game is about to begin!

The game started! Good luck to the hockey players of the Russian national team!

We lost the faceoff! But the skill of Russian hockey players was enough to quickly intercept the puck and break into the opponent's zone

Things have not yet reached the critical moments, teams like are eyeing

Our correspondent conveys sad greetings from the women's hockey match Russia - Finland. In this game for bronze, our hockey players conceded a goal and are now losing with a score of 0:1

Since it has come to this, we will acquaint you with the composition of the Russian women's team

Kirill Kaprizov threw at the gates of the Norwegian team. Failed to hit the goalkeeper

A similar situation occurred at the gates of Vasily Koshechkin, whom the entire team of the sports editorial staff of the site chose as the hero of the photo for the text broadcast

Zubarev took aim and threw from the center of the Norwegian zone. The shot took place, but the hit did not

A series of shots by the Russians on the gates of the Norwegians (the gate is defended by Lars Haugen). The puck never hits the target

With difficulty, the Norwegians were able to transfer the game to the middle zone

I doubt that this information will reassure you so much: the Russian hockey players conceded the same goal, playing with the Finnish team in the numerical minority

And we have Datsyuk throwing with close range, but he failed to hit the gate

Mozyakin dangerously threw - past the gate!

That awkward moment when the puck ended up in the Russian zone. The Norwegian players tried to bring the matter to a throw, but failed in this: ours managed to cope

The Russians are actively pressing the opponent in the Norwegian zone

Russia - Norway. 1:0

GOOOOL! The Russian team opened the scoring, took the lead, hit the gates of the Norwegians!

Against the backdrop of an emotional impulse, which was given by a productive attack, the Russian team went to develop their success. So, Kovalchuk and Datsyuk were thrown dangerously at close range.

Russian hockey players have an amazing advantage over their opponents in terms of the number of shots on goal - 12:1! I won't mind that the same lead will be in our favor in terms of goals in... the final!

The Norwegian team remained in the minority. Niklas Roest sent off for two minutes

Russia - Norway. 2:0

GOOOOOOL! 2:0 in favor of the Russian team! Nikita Gusev threw zero angle, the puck ricocheted into the net from the Norwegian goalkeeper's pad!

So, what's in the women's match? The Russians are still inferior to Finland. But there is at least approximate equality in throws - 7:6 in favor of the Finn

Almost missed the Russian hockey players. Vasily Koshechkin went out of his net to the puck (to warm up, or what?) And put it right on the patch, where the Norwegian Steffen Thoresen was. That unexpectedly did not hit the puck

Datsyuk was close to success, but he could not get into the gate, being in front of them!

Grigorenko quit! But the puck did not go where we all want!

Two minutes left before the end of the period

Russia - Norway. 3:0

And for the third time the puck flies into the gates of Norway. Gusev from behind the gate made a pass “deep” into the zone to Kaprizov, and he sent it even further - to Voinov. And Vyacheslav, after a pause, bitingly shot into the far corner. 3:0 in favor of the Russian team!

That's it, the first period is over. Our hockey players are great!

There was a break in the match between the women's teams of Russia and Finland. Our hockey players are still losing with a score of 0:1.

See you in the second period of matches!

The second period of the match Russia - Norway has begun!

A similar period began in the women's match Russia - Finland. The beginning of this 20-minute there goes with a bang! Russian hockey players conceded the second goal already in the 10th second, but soon reduced the backlog in the score, which is now 2:1 in favor of the Finnish team!

Olga Sosina distinguished herself in the Russian team

And in the match Russia - Norway removal. Our team is in the minority, Sergey Andronov has been removed

Let's acquaint you with the statistics for the first periods of our matches:

Nothing good could be created by the Norwegian team, playing in the numerical majority. However, as in equal compositions, too

Oh yes, the goalkeeper was changed in the Norwegian team. Instead of Lars Haugen now plays Henrik Haukeland.

By the way, we have a removal: Ivan Telegin left the ice

Koshechkin catches the puck after a dangerous shot

Again, the opponent of the Russian national team, playing in the majority, is unconvincing.

Well, here it is: Russia is in full force

Russia - Norway. 3:1

Eh, the Russian players missed it now. The puck rolled out from behind Koshechkin's gate to the center of the zone, where it was received by the Norwegian Alexander Bonsaksen, stopping in football with his foot, after which he threw it at the center of the gate. Koshechkin, apparently, thought that the puck would fly into the corner and rushed there: space was freed up for the puck

The Norwegians have a removal. And none other than Alexander Bonsaksen went to the penalty box - for playing with a high stick

Russia - Norway. 4:1

GOOOOOOL! The Russians increased the gap by realizing their numerical advantage. Ilya Kovalchuk shot from the left to Sergei Kalinin and he was able to correct the stick from the spot just so that the puck slipped past the goalkeeper - 4:1!

Twice in a row now the Russians threw during one game episode on the gates of the Norwegians. This time the gate was not hit (if only from surprise)

Norway - state in Northern Europe , the main part of which is located in the western part Scandinavian Peninsula.

The territory of Norway includes approximately 50,000 small coastal islands, as well as the large Svalbard archipelago, Bear Islands and Jan Mayen Islands in the Arctic Ocean. On a detailed map of Norway, you can find the country's border with three states: with Sweden in the east, with Finland and Russia in the northeast.

Norway is one of the largest oil and gas producers in Europe and a global exporter of timber, titanium and fish.

Norway on the world map: geography, nature and climate

Norway on the world map is located in Northern Europe, in the west of the Scandinavian Peninsula, washed by the waters of the North Sea from the south, Norwegian - from the west, Barents - from the north.

Minerals

The country has large reserves of oil and gas, iron, titanium and zinc. In smaller volumes, there are also deposits of lead, copper, hard coal, apatite and graphite.

Relief

Most of the territory of Norway is occupied by the Scandinavian mountains with numerous fjords (bays deep into the land with rocky shores) and valleys. Northern and southern part The country is occupied by elevated plateaus - fjelds - Yuste-dalsbrs, Telemark, Yutunheimen, in the last of which the highest point of Norway is located - Mount Gallhöpiggen (2470 m).

Hydrography

The river network of Norway is dense, and the rivers themselves are full-flowing, deep and narrow. The rivers are fed by snow-rain or ice. The longest river is the Glomma (619 km), flowing through the east of the country.

About 4 thousand Norwegian lakes occupy 5% of the country's area and are located mainly in southern Norway. The largest lake is Mjosa with an area of ​​365 km 2, located on the map of Norway in Russian in the southern part of the country, 100 km north of the capital Oslo.

There are almost 900 glaciers on the territory of the country, most of which also occur in Southern Norway.

Flora and fauna

Norwegian soils are not very fertile. The most common types of soils are: mountain-meadow, low-humus podzols, podzols, brown, marsh gleyed and others.

There are mixed broad-leaved forests, taiga and coniferous-broad-leaved forests, mountain forests and tundra vegetation in the country. Forests occupy 27% of the country's territory, they grow: oaks, beeches, ash trees, birches, spruces, mosses and lichens.

Lynxes, deer, martens, ermines, squirrels, bears, hares and foxes are found in local forests and tundra; and among the representatives of birds - capercaillie, black grouse, gulls, geese and other birds. Fish of the salmon family live in fresh water, and herring, mackerel, and cod live in sea water.

The protected areas of Norway include 37 national parks, several nature reserves and about a hundred wildlife preserves.

Climate

Norway's climate varies from mild temperate maritime in the south, temperate continental in the center, to subarctic in the very north of the country. The climate of Norway is significantly softened under the influence of the warm currents of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans, characterized by mild, for such high latitudes, winters and cool summers. The average January temperature in Norway ranges from -17°C in the far north to +2°C in the southwest of the country, while the average July temperatures range from +7°C to +17°C respectively. Cloudy and rainy weather prevails in Norway - approximately 800 - 1200 mm of precipitation falls annually.

Map of Norway with cities. Administrative division of the country

Norway consists of 19 counties (provinces, counties), and is also unofficially divided into 5 regions:

• Southern Norway,
• Northern Norway,
• Western Norway,
• Eastern Norway,
• Central Norway.

Largest cities

• Oslo- the capital and most important city of Norway, located on the banks of the Oslo Fjord, in the southeast of the country. Oslo is big seaport and center oil and gas industry, as well as one of the most expensive cities in the world. Akershus Fortress, built in the 13th century, is the main attraction of the city. Oslo is home to 673,000 people.
• Bergen- the second largest city in the country, which on the map of Norway with cities in Russian can be found in its western part. Being on the coast of the North Sea determines the main specialization of the city - maritime business and maritime research(oceanography). The population of Bergen is 273 thousand people.
• Alesund- another city on the west coast of Norway, largest center fishing industry of the country. Three kilometers west of Alesund is a large aquarium, which clearly shows the life of marine life. North Atlantic in the most natural conditions - cod, eels, halibut and other fish - because the water comes directly from the sea. The population of the city is 42 thousand people.