Arms Limiting and Force Adjusting Arrangements in the Northern Gap Area

DOI10.1177/001083677200700204
AuthorJohan Jörgen Holst
Publication Date01 July 1972
SubjectArticle
Arms Limiting
and
Force Adjusting Arrangements in the
Northern
Cap
Area
JOHAN JORGEN HOLST
Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Oslo
Holst, J. J. Arms Limiting and Force Adjusting Arrangements in the Northern Cap
Area. Cooperation
and
Conflict,
Ul
l, 1972, 1
I.~-20.
The author starts out by delineating the existing system of unilateral arms control
measures which is observed by Norway. He distinguishes between unilateral formal
measures on the one hand and semi-formal measures on the other. To the former
belong the policy on foreign bases and nuclear weapons while the latter include the
restrictions applying to allied military exercises and the presence of allied aircraft in
Norwegian air space and naval vessels in Norwegian territorial waters. The present
era of political reconstruction in Europe may generate force reduction and force ad-
justment regulations as part of the security infrastructure of the post-cold war Europe.
Thus the Norwegian constraints would have to be viewed in a novel context and
their possible multilateralization considered. Against the background of a delineation
of the relationship of forces in the Northern Cap area the author suggests various
activity regulation measures aimed at depoliticizing military force in the area (restric-
tions on manoeuvres, new stationing of forces, notification of manoeuvres). The naval
situation in the Norwegian Sea illustrates the interrelationshir between the regional
security situation and the superpower balance, The outcome 0SALT will affect the
situation, but the author also suggests various arrangements involving ceilings 011
naval activity in the Norwegian Sea.
[olutn jiirgen Holst, Norwegian Institute of
lntcrnational
Affairs,
Oslo.
The
purpose
of
this
analysis
is to discuss
certain
arms
limitation
and
force
adjusting
measures in
connection
with
Norwegian
and
European
security
policy. Iwish to
base
my
study
on
the
existing
arrange-
ments
and
then
outline
the
contours
of
potential
future
arrangements
and
the
contexts these
might
be associated with.
It
would
seem
appropriate
to
distinguish
between
unilateral
measures on
the
one
side
and
reciprocal
or
multilateral
ar-
rangements
on
the
other.
It
might
also be
useful to
make
a
distinction
between
formal
agreements
and
informal
arrange-
ments
I.
UNILATERAL
AND
FORMAL
MEASURES
Since 1949
Norway
has
adopted
asecurity
policy
aimed
at
combining
deterrence
and
reassurance
in
her
relations
with
the
So-
viet
Union.
The
allied
cooperation
in
NATO
has
been
the
basis of
the
deter-
rence.
Unilateral
force
adjusting
measures
8Cooperation and Conflict 1972:S
have
had
as
their
purpose
reduction
of
the
insecurity
felt by
the
Soviet
Union
and
the
Scandinavian
countries
as a con-
sequence of
the
Norwegian
security
mea-
sures.
The
Norwegian
base
reservation
was
the
first
and
most
important
of these
arrangements.
The
base
reservation
was
unilateral
in
the
sense
that
it was formed
as a
declaration
from
the
Norwegian
gov-
ernment
and
was
not
part
of
any
binding
agreement
with
other
states.
It
was
formal
in
the
sense
that
it was
prepared
in
the
form of a
note
from
the
Norwegian
gov-
ernment
to
the
Soviet
government.
The
terms
'base
reservation'
and
'base
policy'
are
in
fact
somewhat
misleading
as the
reservation
is
related
to
the
stationing
of
combat forces
of
foreign
powers
on
Nor-
wegian
soil.
The
reservation
is conditional in
the
sense
that
it
applies
only
'as
long
as
Nor-
way
is
not
attacked
or
subject
to
threats
of
attack'.
The
measures
taken
by
other
nations
which
might
be
considered
to
bring
about
a
change
in
the
Norwegian

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT