I think it’s very good that Nordea provides credit to responsible Norwegian energy companies. In question here are Equinor, Vår Energi, etc. I would agree that a few years ago, this could have been criticized, and of course, it can still be criticized now. It’s good to remember the following:
- The geopolitical and especially energy-political situation has changed radically, and energy self-sufficiency is an existential question for Europe. Nordea has, of course, made contradictory statements earlier, but the global situation is very different now.
- Over a dozen banks are financing these Arctic operations. Nordea or the Nordic countries cannot afford excessive idealism. Nordea’s withdrawal could negatively affect its other international business if counterparties perceive Nordea as acting from an ideological perspective and bending to activist barking.
- Even after this financing, Nordea’s involvement in fossil fuel financing is crumbs compared to what it has been in the last decade.
Is it ideal or optimal to utilize the Arctic region? No, it’s not. Is it responsible? A complex question, but I lean towards the idea that it would be completely irresponsible to opt out and preach to the Norwegians about it. The Norwegian state is, however, a very responsible owner and capital allocator.
Also, the party that brought up this issue at the general meeting is an ideological actor whose legitimacy can be questioned. Strong links to leftism, which is not surprising at all.