Instltutt for forsvarsstudler (IFS) Tollbugt. 10, 0152 Oslo 1, Norge lNSTITUTT FOR FORSVARSSTUDIER • lFS - (tidligere Forsvarsltistorisk forskningssenter) er en faglig uavhengig instirusjon som driver forskning med et samtidshistorisk perspektiv innenfor omr!dene norsk forsvars- og sikkerhets­ politikk, Russland-studier og strategiske studier. IFS er administrativt tilknyttet Forsvarets h~gskole, og virksomheten stir under tilsyn av Rldet for FORSVARSSTUDIER 7/1993 forsvarsstudier med representasjon fra Forsvarets overkommando, Forsvars­ departementet. Forsvarets h!ligskole og universitetet i Oslo. Forskningssje{" professor Olav Ri.ste. FORS VARSSTUDIER tar sikte pA A v:ere et forum for forskningsarbeider innenfor institusjonens arbeidsomdder. De synspunkter som kommer til uttrykk i Forsvarsstudier stAr for forfatterens egen regnjng. Hel eller delevis gjengivelse av innholder kan bare skje med forfarterens samtykk.e. A Soviet Grab for lNSTITUTT FOR FORS VARSSTUDIER -lFS- NORWEGIAN lNSTIIUTE the High North? FOR DEFENCE STUDIES (former Forsvarshistorisk forskningssenter - Research Centre for Defence History) conducts independent research from a contemporary history perspective on defence and security issues, Russian studies and strategic studies. IFS is administratively attached to the National USSR, Svalbard, and Defence College, and its activities are supervised by the CoWl.cil for Defence Stu,lies, composed of representatives from the Defence Command, the Ministry Northern Norway 1920-1953 of Defence, the National Defence College and the University of Oslo. Director: Professor Olav Riste. D. Phi/. (O:wn) FORSVARSSTUDIER - Defence Studies - aims to provide a forum for research papers within the field of activities of the Norwegian Institute for Defence Studies. The viewpoints expressed are those of the authors. The author's pennission is required for any reproduction, wholly or in part, of the Sven G. Holtsmark contents. Editor: RolfTamnes Trykk: Hamr:rykk. A/S. Distribuert gjennom Forsvarets overkommando Distribusjonssentralen. ISSN 0333-3981 1. Introduction . 5 2. 1920-1939: The emergence of Soviet interests in the High North . 14 1920-1924: The USSR and the Svalbard Treaty . 14 1925-1939: Territorial claims and economic interests . 25 3. 1939-1944: The awakening of Soviet strategic interests in the High North . 35 1939-1941: The appearance of an activist attitude . 36 1942-1944: Svalbard again at tbe periphery . 46 4. 1944-1945: Molotov stakes his claims on Svalbard . 50 Molotov's demarche of 12 November 1944 . 51 The bureaucratic foundation of Molotov's initiative . 57 Norway searches for a solution . 64 5. 1945-1947: Foreshadows of the Cold War . 77 Summer 1945: Soviet bureaucrats on the offensive . 78 Western perspectives on the High North . 91 Spring 1946: Molotov under pressure . 101 Autumn 1946: Molotov makes his move . 111 February 1947: Norway turns the tables . 117 6. 1947-1953: The return to status quo . 124 Soviet reactions to Norway's preemption . 125 Soviet strategic reassessments . 130 Back to square one . 134 1951: Moscow on the defensive . 145 1953: Molotov's Svalbard foray postmortem . 153 7. Concluding remarks . 155 1. Introduction At 2 a.m. on 12 November 1944, the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs Viaches1av M. Molotov presented the Nmwe­ gian Minister for Foreign Affairs Trygve Lie with far-reaching proposals for a change in the international legal status of the Svalbard (Spitsbergen) archipelago in the High North of the Arctic Ocean.' Lie had come to Moscow to finalise a number of agreements underlining the spirit of cooperation and alliance which, on the face of it at least, characterised the relationship between the Norwegian government-in-exile and the Soviet government after more than three years of struggle against the common enemy. Being totally unprepared, Lie was shocked and deeply worried by Molotov's proposals. Molotov demanded, 1 There is some confusion over the terms Spitsbergen and Svalbard. In Norwegian usage (since 1969) the name Spitsbergen applies only to the largest island in the archipelago. Until 1969 this was called Vestspitsbergen (Western Spitsbergen). Svalbard is the name of the whole of the archipelago as defined by the Treaty of 1920, including the distant Bear Island which is located approxi­ mately halfway between Spitsbergen and the North Cape. In this respect Norwegian usage is in accordance with the letter of the Treaty. The important point to bear in mind is that the term Svalbard, in Norwegian usage and according to the Treaty, covers all islands within the area defined by the Treaty. English speakers tend to prefer the term Spitsbergen to the unfamiliar Svalbard, although for instance Encyclopedia Britannica defmes the terms in accordance with Norwegian usage. Russian usage is different. "Shpitsbergen" (old name "Gru­ mant") is used in Russian to denote the "main" archipelago, while Bear Island (Ostrov medvezhii) is normally listed as a separate entity. Cf. the terminology used in L.D. Timchenko, Shpitsbergen: Istoriia i sovremennost, Kharkov, 1992. In the following text I will use Svalbard to denote the entire area as defined by the Treaty, except when referring directly to Russian sources or statements. 5 inter alia, that the Paris Treaty on Svalbard of 1920 should be the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation.' declared null and void, that sovereignty over Bear Island should These documents have only recently been declassified and made be transferred to the Soviet Union, and that the maio Spits­ available to Russian and foreign scholars. Indeed, the archives bergen archipelago should be administered as a Soviet-NOiwe­ themselves were until 1990 practically closed for iodependent gian condominium, i.e. that it should come under joint Soviet­ historical research. Norwegian control. !he focus is on Soviet policy. The study encompasses the Molotov's overture led to hectic activity on the part of the pe?od from 1920 to 1953, with emphasis on the years 1944-51. Norwegians, and there followed an exchange between the two Wrth regard to this period of Soviet attempts to alter Svalbard's governments. In the first phase of the negotiations the Norwe­ int~mational status, I shall discuss some aspects of Norwegian gians tried to take the initiative from the Soviets, and presented policy as well. Norwegian historians have studied the "Svalbard their own counterproposals for a solution. This policy, which question". from the :'?rwegian perspective from its begioning in was heavily influenced by the advice of the Norwegian Ambas­ 1944 until the decrsron taken by the Stortiog (Parliament) in sador in Moscow, Rolf Andvord, culminated in the Norwegian February 1947 to close the matter as a subject for bilateral draft declaration of 9 April 1945. In this document, which went Norwegian-Soviet discussions. Attention has also been focused a long way towards accommodating the most important Soviet ?n the foll?wiog y~ars, when Svalbard continued to play a role demands, the Norwegians expressed their agreement in principle m Norwegian, Sovret and Western military-strategic and foreign to an arrangement for joint Soviet-Norwegian defence of the policy deliberations. Soviet sources throw additional light on the and conduct of some of the Norwegian officials, in Spitsbergen island. vie~s In the ensuing years the Svalbard question was one of the particular Trygve Lie, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and Rolf key elements influencing Norwegian policy towards the Soviet Andvord, the Ambassador in Moscow. An attempt will be made Union. It also seems clear that it speeded up the erosion of the to relate my own findiogs to the maio conclusions of earlier studies.' benevolent attitude towards the Soviet Union which characte­ rised Norwegian political circles during and immediately after the war. However, the offensive Soviet attitude during the 2 _Arlchiv. Vneshnei Po/itild Rossiiskoi F ederatsii (AVPRF, Svalbard negotiations of 1944-47 contrasts with the basic Forergn Policy Archives of the Russian Federation), Moscow. 1 stability and absence of serious tension which characterised would like_ to thank Dr Igor V. Lebedev, Director of the Depart­ Norwegian-Soviet cohabitation on Svalbard for most of the men~ of His~ry and Records of the Russian Ministry for Foreign period under review. Affarrs, for hrs forthcoming attitude during my numerous visits to Much has been written about Svalbard io Norwegian-Soviet the MID archives. I am equally grateful to Dr Lebedev's deputies relations by Norwegian historians. However, previous and the rest of his staff. 3 historiography has been based on Norwegian and, to a signifi­ For the period up to 1925, the basic work is Trygve Mathisen cant although lesser degree, British and American sources. This Svalbard i internasjona/ politikk, 1871-1925, Oslo, 1951. Forth~ study is based mainly on Soviet material from the archives of wartime period the most detailed study is Olav Riste's discussion in ~e second volume of his "London-regjeringa". Norge i krigs­ allzansen 1940-1945, Oslo, 1979. When Riste wrote his study, parts of the collectiOns of the Norwegian Ministry for Foreign Affairs 6 7 The study will focus on the following aspects: of Cold War and super power tensions.• I will argue that this was even more the case in the interwar period. Even during the Second 1. The Soviet rationale. What kind of deliberations and motives guided Soviet policy? The chronological aspect is obviously World War ~~bard attracted only occasional attention from