158
Arctic Yearbook 2013
Kirkenes-Nikel
Norway to the full extent‖. Russians visiting Kirkenes do not have the feeling of being abroad, as
also indicated by Kirkenes being named ‗Kirsanovka‘ or ‗Kirik‘ with connotations of a small local
and nearby entity/village in the language used in the Murmansk region. Visits have become frequent
for reasons of shopping or, for that matter, using the Kirkenes airport for flights abroad.
In one of its aspects, the Norwegian-Russian cross-border cooperation can draw upon the
somewhat idealized legacy of the so-called Pomor trade, i.e. a trade with Pomors exchanging flour
for fish (Niemi, 2005). These coastal trade contacts, which lasted for nearly three centuries before
dwindling out after the Russian revolution in 1917, were quite important for the development of the
northern areas. The legacy is frequently referred to and activated with the current-day cooperation
and border-crossing seen as a return to traditional constellations.
Still another memory impacting in particular local attitudes consists of the fact that a considerable
number of German troops were stationed in the region, pursuing quite repressive policies, and it was
freed by the Soviet Army in 1944. For sure, the Cold War period, with perceptions of enmity as the
prevalent approach, impacted the views on Russians. The negative views have, however, gradually
changed and normalized. As mentioned above, it became a common tradition to jointly celebrate the
date of the liberation of the Murmansk region and East Finnmark from the Nazi occupants in
October 1944.
In addition to a growing number of Russian and Russian-speaking inhabitants in Kirkenes, there is a
considerable number of Russians arriving from the Murmansk region for shopping as well as sailors
visiting the town. The latter group is there because Russian fishing vessels frequently visit the port of
Kirkenes (with some 30–50 ships at port any time) (Rogova, 2008: 15). A shopping mall has been
recently built in the town with visiting Russians seen as an essential part of the customers. Overall,
various forms of cooperation across the border have turned rather significant for the economy of
the town as well as Sør-Varanger at large.
Conclusions
The Kirkenes-Nikel twinning initiative that has been launched in 2008 demonstrates a quite positive
dynamics regardless the unfavorable economic and political conditions surrounding this project. It
covers a broad spectrum of issues ranging from ambitious industrial and transport infrastructure
projects to cultural, educational, youth and women‘s cooperative schemes. There is still considerable
emphasis on humanitarian aspects of twinning, although cultural/humanitarian bonds have been
increasingly related to more pragmatic and interest-driven forms of cooperation. The case of
Kirkenes-Nikel is hence clearly to be understood as a laboratory introduced in order to explore and
test the prospects for cooperation in a broader context.
The broader background also implies that over time the twinning between Kirkenes-Nikel might be
integrated into a broader pattern of trans-border cooperation between Norway and Russia with
several other cities and regional actors as a part of the configuration.