On the 5th of February, the government of Russia will review the so called anti-crisis plan for the year 2016. The main idea of which, it seems, is the expansion of the privatisation of government companies. The previous privatisation program, which was implemented in 2011 until 2013, was expecting in influx of of $28,7 billion into the budget of Russia. 60% of this program was completed.
Especially interesting is the possibility of the privatisation of the oil company “Rosneft”, at the moment controlled by the company “Rosneftegas”, which belongs to the government. The privatisation of the oil branch has a political as well as en economic impact for Russia. It is considered by certain analysts that this change of ownership could bring about a fundamental redistribution in the influence of the government in the country.
This connection has displayed an interesting tendency. As soon as negotiations regarding the sale of the government-owned company “Rosneft” commence, the critics of it’s current activities and it’s current leader Igor Sechin emerge. He is blamed, first and foremost, for the “unprofitable” purchase of TNK-BP. At the same time as blaming Igor Sechin for the expensive purchase in conjunction with the market of the time, the very same critics suggest a very low price for the sale of “Rosneft”. If we look at the recent large ex-pit transactions, the current stock quotes of “Rusoil” do not reflect it’s actual price when considering the economic sanctions imposed by the West and the current stock quotes of the market.
Yesterday, President Vladimir Putin gave a description of the future buyer. It is a transparent company registered in Russia which does not use any government bank money for the purchase. The perfect candidate according to this portrait is the owner of “Lukoil”, Vagit Alekperov, who almost openly talks of his interest in this deal. During the continuation of the Western sanctions, other buyers could be China and India, but in this case there are a lot of questions.

The purchase of TNK-BP and the building of “Rosneft” in it’s current state served as a huge blow to those who wish to control the fuel and energy complex of Russia. This is Sechin’s main “sin”, and for this he is berated. Why now? To push back the process of the sale, if only by prolonging the said process.

Rosneft is an integrated oil company majority owned by the Government of Russia.
Rosneft became Russia’s leading extraction and refinement company after purchasing assets of former oil giant Yukos at state-run auctions. In March 2013, Rosneft became the largest publicly traded oil company, after buying TNK-BP.

Several Norwegian companies now confirm that their contracts with the Russian oil producer Rosneft being terminated. Among them are Siem Offshore, Rem Offshore and Viking Supply.

The companies were all working closely with Rosneft had comprehensive drilling operation in the Kara Sea.

The oilmen, most of them Norwegians, were commuting great distances to and from the field. they first traveled by plane to the Norwegian border town of Kirkenes and from there crossed the Russian border to Murmansk. There, in the port of Lavna, they embarked a ship which took them all the way to the far Arctic Kara Sea. All together, the distance is estimated to about 5000 km.

By Per Wilhelm Myhre and N.Sethu

“Lukoil” has included the sector in the region of Svalbard (Shpittzbergen in Russian) which is considered an economically independent zone, in the next round of auctioning that Norway is holding. The Norway Ministry of oil has recently made the decision to increase the inventory of the sectors of hydrocarbon , which are offered to energy companies within the regulations of the 23rd licensing round.
The sector is located within the zone of the Svalbord quadrant, which is internationally considered to be a zone which is independent from any country’s economic activities (both Norway and Russia have previously laid claims to this territory).

Earlier the Russian Government has urged their companies to hold off from any works in this region, as it may be considered by Norway to be admission of their economic right over the Svalbord quadrant.
That is why, for example, Rosneft is not taking part in the auction. British Petroleum have also declined to take part. In accordance with the 1920 agreement regarding Shpitzberhgen (the document was signed by the USA, the UK, India, Denmark, France, Italy, Japan, Norway, the Netherlands, Sweden and the USSR as of 1935), any country has the right to “equal free access for any purpose”.

Lukoil is Russia’s second largest oil company and its second largest producer of oil company produced million tons of oil (1.813 million barrels) per day.

Headquartered in Moscow, Lukoil is the second largest public company in terms of proven oil and gas reserves.

The company has operations in more than 40 countries around the world.

(N.Sethu)

Russia will reportedly not accept refugees deported from Norway. The move by the Russian government comes as Norway seeks to tighten requirements for asylum seekers and send some refugees to Russia. Thousands of asylum-seekers have crossed from Russia into Norway since the refugee crisis began.Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made the announcement yesterday at a press conference, reports the Nordic Page.
“The talk is about people who arrived in Russia with a purpose of either to work in Russia or to visit relatives. They had not declared their purpose of visit as transit to Norway,” Lavrov said.

“This means that they had deliberately stated false data about the purpose of their visit to the Russian Federation. This is why we do not want to admit these people back to Russia.”

Refugees have been entering Norway through Russia since October, and Norway has recently begun to send refugees back to Russia. Russia has agreed to take in a limited number of refugees who traveled to Norway in 2015, reports Reuters.

“Russia has always said they are not interested in taking back most of the 5,400 refugees. But we have an understanding with Russia that we can send back those who have a valid visa and residency in Russia,” said Norse Foreign Minister Rune Bjaastad.
The area around Russia, Norway and Finland is frequently traversed by refugees fleeing violence in the Middle East, reports Foreign Policy. The policies of Norway and Russia will have a significant effect on the thousands of refugees who pass through the nations.

While Norway is not a member of the European Union, it is inside the Schengen passport-free travel zone. This means that migrants are free to travel elsewhere in Europe without a passport from Norway.

Norway will also reportedly deport some 4,800 additional asylum seekers who are not residents of Russia to their native countries.

Norway’s right-leaning government has taken steps before to curb the flow of refugees into the country. In December 2015, Norway’s immigration ministry began a push for more stringent asylum requirements to escape “violent consequences” for Norway.

The United Nations’ refugee agency UNHCR expressed concern Wednesday over Norway’s policy on returning refugees to Russia and plans to tighten rules for family reunifications. “We consider that the Norwegian procedure … is cause for concern,” the UNHCR’s representative in the Nordic region, Pia Prytz Phiri, told reporters at the close of a three-day visit.”It’s a problem for us that Norway considers Russia a safe asylum country,” she said.
Norway decided in November that refugees who arrived in the Scandinavian country after having stayed legally in Russia had to be swiftly sent back to Russia — without having their asylum applications considered — since Oslo considered Russia a safe country.

Some 5,500 refugees arrived in Norway via the “Arctic route” through Russia last year.

After sending some 200 people back, Norway stopped returning refugees to Russia at Moscow’s request, as Russian authorities cited “security reasons”.
But Norway has said it is negotiating a resumption with Moscow.

The Norwegian return policy risks depriving some legitimate asylum seekers of their right to protection, the UNHCR warned.

An independent body within the Norwegian immigration authority, Landinfo, said it had been informed by the UN agency that Russia had in January 2015 expelled two Syrians back to their war-torn country.

Norwegian Immigration and Integration Minister Sylvi Listhaug, speaking at the same press conference as Phiri Wednesday, assured that “we are of course going to listen to what the UN has to say”.

She added however that “there are situations where the UN recommendations go beyond what our commitments are in respect to international conventions”.

The UNHCR also said it was “deeply concerned” by Norway’s plans to tighten rules for family reunifications.

The right-wing coalition government, which includes an anti-immigration party, has proposed that a person must have studied or worked for at least four years before being allowed to bring over their family.

The proposal, which is still in the early stages, would require parliament’s green light and the government does not hold a majority.

Norwegian migration police superintendent Tor Espen Haga reports that Norway returned about 600 asylum seekers arriving from Russia back to that country in November through December 2015, according to NRK. These are the people with permits for residence in Russia, he said, NRK wrote.”Those who don’t have Russian residence permits won’t be sent back. Norway will either consider their application for asylum or send to the countries which had refused them asylum before,” Haga said.
According to him, Norway returned 250 asylum seekers to Russia in December and 343 people during the second half of November. From 15 to 40 people are sent back to Russia every day.

“The Russians accept all those who have permits for residence in Russia before they go to Norway,” he said.

As UNIAN reported earlier, Norway’s justice minister earlier said that those who arrived from Russia to seek asylum in Norway would be sent back if they had documents allowing them to stay in Russia.

Russia on Sunday confirmed it had shut for “security reasons” an Arctic border post with Norway to migrants being controversially returned from the Nordic country. Norway on Saturday said it was temporarily halting its return of migrants — mainly from Syria, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq — who had entered from Russia following a request from the authorities there.Some 5,500 migrants crossed from Russia into Norway last year, on the last leg of an arduous journey through the Arctic to Europe.
But the right-wing government in Oslo has decided that migrants who had been living legally in Russia, or had entered Russia legally, should be immediately returned there, on the basis that Russia is a safe country.

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova told AFP that Moscow had informed Norway on Friday that it was halting the return of migrants through the Borisoglebsk-Storskog crossing in line with a 2011 bilateral agreement.

Exceptions will, however, be made for any migrants who can be shown to meet the criteria of an earlier agreement that obliges Moscow to readmit them if they do not fulfil Norwegian immigration laws and have valid Russian visas or residence permits.

“The steps taken by Russia were dictated by security reasons and based on bilateral agreements with Norway,” Zakharova said.

Norwegian police returned 13 migrants by bus to Russia on Tuesday and two similar operations were scheduled for Thursday and Friday but were then cancelled, for what officials said were logistical reasons.

The foreign ministry in Norway said there would be no more returns “until further notice” and that Russian border authorities “want more coordination” in future.

Rights groups had expressed outrage at the migrants being forced to return by bike in winter, when temperatures in the far north regularly fall to minus 20 degrees Celsius (minus four Fahrenheit).

They also say that Russia has a poor record on dealing with requests for asylum, with the process sometimes taking years and applicants running the risk of being arrested and expelled to their country of origin.

Norway is not within the European Union, but is a member of the Schengen passport-free zone.

Many migrants arrived in the country by bicycle as Russian authorities do not let people cross the border on foot and Norway considers people driving migrants across the border in a car or truck to be traffickers.
(digitaljournal)

Thomas Nilsen, the former editor of an online newspaper in Arctic Norway who was recently fired, may have been a victim of Norway’s unusual relationship with Russia in the Arctic, suggests a piece in the BBC Magazine. Nilsen was fired from the BarentsObserver in late September.
“The disagreement stemmed, Nilsen says, from the paper’s coverage of Russia – particularly an article he wrote during the Ukraine crisis criticising Russian president Vladimir Putin’s increasing crackdown on independent media and voluntary organisations,” the BBC wrote.
BarentsObserver’s owner, Norwegian Barents Secretariat, a company owned by the three counties in Norway’s north, dismissed those claims: “The paper’s owners say Nilsen’s sacking had nothing to do with the paper’s Russian coverage, and they never had any contact with any Russian official,” the BBC reported.

Despite such denials, the story became a a national one in Norway, where the national broadcaster claimed Russian security officials were involved in the move (a claim Russia’s embassy in Norway denied).

Tension over the firing and its aftermath highlights the unusual nature of Russia and Norway’s Arctic border.

Despite tensions elsewhere between Russia and the West, citizens of both nations travel freely across the border in the region, and enjoy economic ties that include fisheries and oil — though parts of that sector have been harmed by sanctions.

The region has also seen an influx of refugees crossing into Europe through Russia’s Arctic.

Nilsen, for his part, said he valued the cross-border friendships, but also “rejects any suggestion that Norwegian media should keep quiet about problems in Russia as a price to ensure good relations,” according to the BBC.

He’s now working to launch his own online publication to cover events in the region.

Russian experts will conduct an aerial surveillance flight over Norway in an An-30 cartography aircraft within the scope of the Treaty on Open Skies, the head of Russia’s Nuclear Risk Reduction Center said on Monday.”The surveillance flight with a maximum range of 1,700 kilometers (1,056 miles) will take place between November 23-27, taking off from Bardufoss Airport,” Sergei Ryzhkov said.
Norwegian experts will be on board the plane to oversee the observance of treaty clauses, he added. The flight, Russia’s 38th Open Skies flight this year, will take place to enhance mutual openness in military activities among the treaty signatories, according to the official.

Norwegian and British experts conducted a similar flight over Russia between August 24-28.
The Treaty on Open Skies entered into force from 2002, providing for unarmed aerial surveillance flights between member states. With 34 states ratifying the agreement, 27 states are Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) members. Russia ratified the agreement in 2001.

(sputniknews)

Norway has set itself up against Russia, and therefore we are being punished, says Aftenposten’s former editor, Kjell Dragnes. Norway has objected against the superpower, the neighbour in the East, and we are simply being punished for it, says Dragnes to NRK. Dragnes was until recently editor of foreign affairs for Aftenposten, and he has been Moscow correspondent for the newspaper twice.
Last week, 2,000 asylum seekers came to Norway. Approximately every fourth came from Russia, according to the Directorate of Immigration (UDI).
Only 35 have come to Finland, even though Finland has a much longer border with Russia than Norway. But Finland is not a NATO country.

– It leaves the impression that Russia does it on purpose. If such is the case it is very serious, says the Progress Party’s parliamentary leader in Parliament, Harald Tom Nesvik.

Dragnes believes that this must be seen in connection with the Norwegian government’s sanctions against Russia after the country annexed Crimea, and the supported the war in eastern Ukraine. Norway introduced the same sanctions as the European Union against Russia.

– Now Russia sees the opportunity to punish Norway by sending unwanted people to Norway by expelling them, says Dragnes.

Norway has also been affected by Russia’s counter economic sanctions. Russia has introduced a stop of food imports, including import of Norwegian fish.

– This is Russian hybrid warfare against Norway. The reason is that we are a NATO country that shares a border with Russia, says a high ranking source to aldrimer.no.

Hybrid Warfare is a collective term for hidden warfare and state influence operations and propaganda.

Organized by the FSB
The practical arrangements of the refugee traffic to the Russian-Norwegian border is by the FSB in Murmansk, in partnership with organized criminal groups, writes aldrimer.no citing intelligence sources who say that it is well known that the FSB, which is also responsible for Russian espionage against Norway, has close ties to the Russian mafia and other criminal groups.

In Russia, a very organized transport and support operation is established. In addition to human smuggling, there is also a very professional and extensive sale of bicycles to “refugees”, given that it is not allowed to walk across the border. Norwegian or Russian citizens who drive refugees across the border could be punished.

The route to the Norwegian-Russian border is also being actively promoted on social media, writes the outlet.

And while Russian border guards require a Schengen visa to be let into Russia, there is no such requirement at the border to Norway – to seek asylum.

However, the “refugees” – mostly Afghanis, who have lived a long time in Russia – have to bicycle across the border, as walking is not allowed.

The bikes are left right after the border crossing into Norway, and the “refugees” are then free to seek asylum.

No, it’s not Disneyland, but almost.

Russia of course denies any involvement in the matter.

– Russia has nothing to do with the flow of refugees to Norway. Norway is too kind, and therefore asylum seekers come to Norway, says Russia’s Consul General in Kirkenes, to Nettavisen.

(speisa)

Norwegian authorities say that Russians are blackmailing government workers, including MPs, into revealing state secrets by tricking them with duplicitous gifts like vodka and attractive women—a well-known strategy from the Cold War era.The head of counterintelligence for Norway’s Police Security Service, Arne Christian Haugstøyl, told state broadcaster NRK (link in Norwegian) that a growing number of Norwegians have been coming forward to report they have fallen into traps set by Russian spy agencies. He called the trend “alarming” and said Norwegian officials “must be more aware of” the problem.

According to the Local, Haugstøyl suspects that Norwegians are particularly susceptible to being bamboozled when they are abroad, saying its people are too trusting when traveling outside the country. He also said that the number of blackmailing cases may be larger than authorities can account for “because some people will undoubtedly feel the pressure is so large that they will not report it to us, or to their employer when they return” from a trip abroad.

With Russia’s military buildup in the Arctic, Norway said Thursday it needed to modernize its defenses, Reuters reported. Norway, a NATO member state, shares a small border with Russia in the Arctic where there has been increased military activity.“Our neighbor in the east has built up its military capacity, also in areas close to us,” said Admiral Haakon Bruun-Hanssen of Norway’s navy. “They have shown that they are willing to use military force to achieve political ambitions.”
Norway’s defense forces would need more than $21 billion beyond what was budgeted for the next 20 years, Bruun-Hanssen said. Russia’s military actions in both Ukraine and Syria have created uncertainty across Europe. Norway also mentioned it was now facing cyber and terrorist threats, as well.

Norway’s Defense Minister Ine Eriksen Søreide said Western relations with Russia had been permanently altered over Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Russia annexed the Crimean peninsula in March 2014, after which a war in eastern Ukraine began pitting government forces against Russian-backed separatists. The conflict has caused the deaths of approximately 8,000 people and displaced 1.4 million. Russia has continued to deny any direct military involvement in the conflict.

“We are faced with a different Russia,” Søreide said speaking with CNN. “I want to warn against the fact that some people see this as something that is going to pass. The situation has changed. And it has changed profoundly.”

Other European countries also have embarked on modernizing their defense capabilities amid uncertainty over Russia. Poland has begun a military modernization program at a cost of more than $35 billion. Poland and Sweden signed a military cooperation agreement in September that also cited Russian military fears. Sweden said it had increased its own military spending by 11 percent.

“Once a sea of peace, the Baltic has become a sea of danger,” said Polish Defense Minister Tomasz Siemoniak.

Norway’s announcement came as Russia continued its airstrikes in Syria Thursday. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said his country was not targeting American-backed forces. “We targeted ISIL-associated depots, armaments and sites,” he said, referring to the Islamic State militant group.

(ibtimes)
Back

Norway’s opposition leader is worried that Olso is wearing down the country’s once close relations with Moscow. Norway’s opposition leader has criticised that country’s current government for failing to maintain good relations with Russia.Jonas Gahr Støre, the head of Arbejderpartiet, and the former foreign minister, agreed that Oslo ought to take a hard-line against Moscow over its involvement in eastern Ukraine, but said in an interview with Klassekampen, a left-leaning newspaper, that this should not come at the expense of good overall relations.
During his term as foreign minister, one of Mr Støre’s main concerns was the North. He worked to achieve good relations with Moscow, which led to several breakthrough deals, including the Varangerfjord Agreement, a maritime delimitation agreement in the Barents, and an arrangement that made it easier to cross the Russian-Norwegian border. He now fears several of these agreements might be threatened.

He notes that Oslo’s dissatisfaction that Moscow has permitted asylum seekers to cross the border into northern Norway seems to have worsened the situation.

However, he said he trusted that the government would come to terms with the Kremlin over the refugee situation.

The growing Russian military presence in the Arctic and North Atlantic has increased the strategic significance of Iceland. All nations of Northern Europe must work together to counter the growing threat a Norwegian defence expert argues.Growing Russian presence in the North Atlantic
One of the authors of Norway‘s new defence policy, Rolf Tamnes, told the Icelandic National Broadcasting Service RÚV the greatest security threat to Norway is the growing Russian military presence in the Arctic and North Atlantic. Tamnes argued that since Iceland is part of this region it faces the same challenge as Norway. The answer to these challenges according to Tamnes is a strengthening of NATO and greater military cooperation.

Tamnes points out Russia is extending its reach further into the Atlantic to provide cover for its fleet of nuclear submarines. Russia also seeks to keep other powers out of the North Atlantic and the Arctic. “They seek to keep other powers out of the North Atlantic” Tamnes tells RÚV. “Not only does this region contain Norway, but Iceland as well, so I would say the strategic importance of Iceland has grown from the Russian perspective.”
Tamnes tells RÚV that small nation, like Iceland, cannot face threats like this on their own. This changed reality has again increased the importance of alliances like NATO. “All the nations of Northern Europe should join that effort” Tamnes concludes.

An open seminar on military challenges in Northern Europe tomorrow
Tomorrow, Wednesday September from 22 11:30 to 12:30, Tamnes will be speaking at an open seminar hosted by the Institute of International Affairs at the University of Iceland. The talk is entitled “A Unified Effort. Strategies and Military Challenges in Northern Europe.” The seminar will take place in English and is open to all.

The area above the Arctic Circle is finally getting some attention from western politicians, after Barack Obama’s presidential trip to Alaska and a global climate change conference there. Sure, any jolt of activity is likely a welcome occurrence in these far northern communities, but barring sparse high-profile visits, towns and villages in the Arctic nurture and cultivate local economies on their own.A 60-kilometer wide no-visa zone in the Barents Region, halfway across the Arctic Circle from Alaska, is one tool that locals use to spur economic activity. Spanning both sides of the Norwegian-Russian border, this no-visa zone exists to fuel business collaborations and regional trade there.
The border between Norway and Russia runs 196 kilometers (122 miles) from Finland north to the Barents Sea. On the Norwegian side of the border, the no-visa zone extends 30 kilometers northwest, including the mining town of Kirkenes. On the Russian side, the no-visa zone extends 30 kilometers southeast, encompassing the mining town Nikel. At certain points on the Russian side, the zone even extends further, up to 50 kilometers from the border.

Russian or Norwegian citizens who have lived for three years within this range can buy a €20 ($22.40) permit to travel freely within the whole no-visa area. The permit is valid for three years and allows the holder to stay in the neighboring country for up to 15 days at a time. All travelers must pass through the sole official checkpoint in Storskog, Norway. A more traditional multiple-entry visa costs €35.

Kirkenes and Nikel, both above the Arctic Circle, were once wholly dependent on mining iron and nickel. After the Soviet Union collapsed, local interest grew in developing commercial activity there. The Norwegian and Russian governments eventually established the no-visa zone in 2012 in order to encourage trade across their borders.
“You might think that the locals do a lot of cross-border activity, but it’s not that much. A lot of people from Kirkenes have never been to Russia, and a lot of people in Russia have never been to Kirkenes,” says Hilde Methi, a Kirkenes-based independent art curator. Nevertheless, she says, some cultural and business collaborations go on between Nikel and Kirkenes, beyond the mining. And there’s certainly more people-to-people contact and even international marriages. “Russians come to Norway to go shopping,” she says. “And Norwegians go to Russia to get cheap fuel and petrol.”

Everywhere in the visa-free zone is a shared dark side, too: the growing threat to the region posed by environmental destruction and heavy pollution from local ore mining and petroleum operations in the Barents Sea.

Says Methi, “You see this really polluted part [in Russia] that has a huge impact on the vegetation and soil. The trees are dead.” Mining activities in Kirkenes also perturb the Norwegian side of the border. As in the rest of the Arctic, climate change is contributing strongly to the decline of the environment near Kirkenes and Nikel.

Temperatures are rising twice as fast there than the global warming average below the Arctic Circle, and scientific evidence points to the effects: rising sea levels, flooding, and extreme weather.

(qZ)

Russian customs has for the last 10 months held in impound samples from a sunken nuclear submarine that Russian scientists sent to their Norwegian counterparts to confirm whether the wreck poses any radiological hazards, Norwegian media have reported.The Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority (NRPA), which has participated in several joint missions with Russian authorities to determine whether the sunken K-159 Soviet-built nuclear submarine poses radiological hazards, has requested Norway’s Foreign Minister intervene to secure the samples.
Norway’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for its part said it had received NRPA’s complaints over the samples and will convey them to the Russian Embassy, said NRK, Norway’s national broadcaster.

Nils Bøhmer, Bellona’s executive director and nuclear physicist speculated that the hold up of the samples could be caused by one of two things.

“The reasons come form either someone trying to cause difficulty and spoil good relations between Norway and Russia in the area [of nuclear cleanup cooperation],” he said. “Or it could be that the Russians have something to hide, and that the samples show readings they’d prefer to hide.”

The samples were taken during a August to September 2014 joint Russian-Norwegian expedition to the K-159, a rusted out nuclear submarine, which sank under assisted transport from the Gremikha Russian Naval installation to dismantlement at Polyarny, north of Murmansk.

NRPA and Russian authorities had agreed Russia would get the first crack at analyzing the samples, and then send them on to Norway. But the samples were seized by Russian customs in Murmansk, where they remain under lock and key, possibly gagging the release of critical information about the sub’s disposition.

The August 2003 sinking of the K-159 killed nine of the 10 sailors who were aboard the derelict sub to plug leaks in its hull during the journey.

When it sank, its reactors were filled 800 kilograms of spent uranium fuel, and they now lie under 246 meters of water 130 kilometers from the Norwegian coast on the floor of Kola Bay’s fertile fishing grounds.

Previous examinations of the vessel have tentatively concluded it poses no special radiation hazards. Norwegian and Russian scientists, however, are at odds about how dangerous the sub is. The Russian side said after the September mission that the vessel poses dangers to the immediate undersea environment, while Norway said it’s essentially harmless for now.

But both Norway and Russia agree that the foil thin condition of the hull means that the safest plan involves eventually raising the wreck so that water doesn’t begin to leak into the reactor chambers.

Another possible plan to secure the sub, the NRPA indicated, is to bury it on the seafloor to prevent water ingress into the uranium fuel.

The customs hold up with the samples sent to Norway is therefore causing irritation. During the September joint expedition, Norwegian and Russian scientists took sediment and fish samples surrounding the K-159, which might hold key information on possible radioactive leakage, Norway’s national broadcaster NRK said, quoting an NRPA specialist.

Norway needs the samples to complete the investigation of the vessel and decide further coursed of action, said Inger Margrethe Eikelmann, who heads the NRPA’s northern division.

“The Russians have analyzed their half of the samples, so we know the result, but we want to have samples in Norway as well, so we can do our own analysis,” she said. “Things take time when it comes to working with the Russians, but we can’t wait forever,” she added, and urged Russian and Norwegian customs to come to an agreement.

In a separate interview to the Norwegian English-language news portal thelocal.no, Eikelmann indicated she was not particularly concerned that the locked-up samples secret any unpleasant surprises.

“We have been working very closely with [the Russians] for many years and we are exchanging samples and data every year, so we know that they do a good job with the analysis and the presentation of the results,” said Eikelmann as quoted by the portal. “But we want to finish this project by having a joint report on the expedition.”

Read the original article on Bellona. Copyright 2015. Follow Bellona on Twitter.

(bellona)

Russia and Norway yesterday signed a protocol on the practical measures required for their inter-governmental agreement on early notification of nuclear accidents and exchange of information on nuclear facilities. The protocol was signed in Vienna during the International Atomic Energy Agency’s General Conference by Rosatom director general Sergey Kirienko and Norwegian Radiation Protection Authority director general Ole Harbitz.The protocol includes new procedures for information exchange on various aspects of nuclear and radiation safety, the Russian state nuclear corporation said. These make the entire process between the two countries more systematized, it added. The new document covers nuclear power plants, including Russia’s Kola and Leningrad nuclear power plants, nuclear reactors aboard ships, fresh and used nuclear fuel storage, as well as research and other reactors located in Norway and within the 300km border with Russia.
Rosatom said: “This package of joint measures is undoubtedly to strengthen environmental control in the region and to develop neighbourly relations and cooperation in various areas.”

The protocol has been developed in full compliance with the international commitments and national laws of the two countries, as well as IAEA documents, Rosatom said. In the near future, Russia plans to sign similar documents with other countries that share a border and common interests with Russia, to ensure nuclear and environmental safety, it said.

(World Nuclear News)

The Norwegian Seafood Federation (FHL) has noted the renewal of Russia’s ban on food imports from some western nations, including its former main salmon supplier Norway, is a concern for long-term trade links. “Some of Russia’s importers have already gone bankrupt, and some are still struggling now,” Trond Davidsen of the FHL told Undercurrent News. “It is a worry for when the market re-opens – more may be gone by the time this ban lifts. We might need to build new relationships once trade begins again.”It all depends on the length of time this ban lasts, he said, but added that Norwegian firms are retaining contacts with Russian importers, as is the FHL itself.
The Norwegian Seafood Council (NSC) confirmed it had heard of Russian importers needing to find other suppliers in order to try and remain in business. Geir Bakkevoll, director of communications for NSC, also pointed to other implications in the long run.

“Our analysis is that we expect the Russian seafood market to be changed in different ways during the import ban. The most important change is that when fresh Norwegian salmon is substituted with frozen salmon from other seafood producing nations, the marketing investments will change.”

Also, when there is less salmon with a higher price in the market, consumption will go down, he said.

Borge Prytz Larsen, sales director with major Russian salmon importer Severnaya, is optimistic, despite the ban renewal.

“Some importers have had to close, yes, but that does mean more import volumes available for those left,” he said. “I think maybe 25% of importers have been forced to close; this does mean a slightly better situation for those left.”

When trade does eventually resume Russia will be in for yet another turbulent period, he added, though it is likely to be an easier transition. “Hopefully the currency should be more stable by then. The firms that will have survived the ban can survive anything, I think.”

All three Norwegians — albeit one with the Russian company, Prytz Larsen — noted that this sanction renewal was not unexpected and had been factored in to firms’ plans.

“Previous to the import ban, the Norwegian seafood industry had long experience with trade barriers in Russia, and was thus prepared for such situations,” said Bakkevoll. “Although Russia was an important and long-term development market for Norwegian seafood, the industry has adapted to the situation in the year that has passed.”

NSC data has shown the country’s salmon exports have remained relatively stable in 2015, flat in May 2015 when compared to the previous year.

“Of course we’d like the markets open again; it would result in that much more profitability,” said Davidsen with the FHL. “NSC figures show trade has been great in 2015 – but it could have been that much higher with Russia buying. However, demand is increasing faster than supply, and supply growth should level out soon, so prices should remain strong.”

Currency vital to the market

Indeed, the aforementioned currency issues actually remain vital to the salmon trade, and possibly more important than developments in trade sanctions, several sources agreed.

“The ban continuation wasn’t unexpected, and more important in the coming months will be the weaker ruble,” Kjetil Lye, equity analyst with Handelsbanken Capital Markets, told Undercurrent. “The trade ban is negative, but the ruble is a bigger factor. Russian imports continued on after the ban started [first in August 2014], before falling when the ruble dived in value. Imports became too expensive.”

While it was still able, Russia brought in salmon from Chile and the Faroe Islands – not to fully make up the volumes it had bought from Norway, but a sizeable portion. The ban took a heavy toll on imports in August, but they then recovered to near pre-ban levels in September 2014, thanks to a huge spike in imports from the Faroe Islands and Chile.

Data from Customs Inform showed Chilean exports more than doubled from September 2013 to October 2014, marking a 376% increase year-on-year.

Meanwhile, Faroese exports rose by another 29% from September — or a near five-fold increase when compared to October 2013.

Markets these countries had been supplying, such as the US and some European countries, turned to Norway. However, when Russia’s ruble hit rock bottom and it simply could not buy, excess salmon supplies were available, and this was when the market hurt.

Lye added that he expects Norwegian salmon spot prices to hold as they have done, especially with supply growth gradually slowing down.

“In terms of demand for Norwegian seafood, the exchange rate is more important than the decision to continue the food import ban for another year,” said Henning Lund, equity research analyst with Pareto Securities. “Farming companies have definitely adapted to the market situation, so this should not have too much impact.”

“Spot prices have been stable despite the closure of the Russian market – in fact they’re up year-on-year; they have stayed strong. “The ban continuing is more of a positive for Faroese farmers than it is a negative for Norway’s,” he said.

Bakkafrost CEO Regin Jacobsen told Undercurrent that sales to its Eastern European customers have been stable in the past few quarters, and reiterated that the company, despite being the largest producer in the Faroes, was constrained by its own production levels.

In the third quarter of 2014 its sales of salmon to Eastern Europe made up 24% of its total – compared to just 4% the previous year.

“I think this amount has grown as much as it can,” Bakkafrost marketing manager Arni Olsen told Undercurrent in November 2014. “Our CEO has said exports to Russia are unlikely to increase more, as our limited production means we can’t just drop existing customers to supply Russia.”

“We [the Faroe Islands] have some 70,000t of production – the Russian market is 150,000t. It is our supply, rather than Russian demand, which limits sales there.”

Trout to go on suffering

Davidsen warned Norway’s chief concern in terms of international trade was for its trout. Comparatively minor next to salmon exports, it has struggled to find replacement markets with Russia closed, he said.

“Norway has put a focus on southeast Asia, but it’s taking time to build up trade links there,” he said. “It’s the same for pelagics, a bit of a challenging time growing trade.”

Leroy Seafood Group, as the world’s largest farmed trout producer, noted it has continued to feel the pinch in 2015.

The market outside of Europe reports positive growth, the company noted in its first quarter 2015 results, but the main trend indicates that volumes formerly sold to Russia in Q1 2014 has now been sold to Europe in Q1 2015.

As a result, the growth in supply to important end markets in Europe is much higher than indicated by the growth in export from Norway, it said.

“This dynamic has also had a negative impact on the prices for Atlantic salmon, although the impact on the trout market is much more predominant.”

(undercurrentnews)