Север и рынок. 2013, N 3.

government since the union with Denmark. Its armed forces were no longer as heavily outnumbered in comparison with those o f Sweden. All these experience cumulated for centuries marked by close communication o f the countries allowed to good dialogue base in the present circumstances despite some inconsistencies o f the past. Nevertheless during the Cold war the Northern Europe was filled with disunity and differing security identities. Common historical, cultural, social and linguistic ties could not prevent the division as far as security identities were concerned. Norway and Denmark became the NATO members in 1949 and were within the USA sphere o f influence during the Cold War while Sweden and Finland professed their neutrality but in different ways. The establishment of regional institutions was connected to the direct consequences o f WWII, for example, Norway, Iceland, Sweden and Denmark as well as Austria, France, Luxembourg, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Portugal, Switzerland, Turkey and the UK became members o f the Organization for European Economic Cooperation (OEEC) which intended to be the permanent organization for economic cooperation. It is interesting fact that Finland joined this organization only in 1969 after changing its name to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in 1961. If to consider integration path o f Finland it should be mentioned that this country was also late in joining the United Nations as a full member. Denmark and Norway became the members o f the UN in 1945, Iceland and Sweden in 1946; Finland joined the UN only in 1955. The same situation was with the Council o f Europe. The Council o f Europe was established in 1949 while Treaty o f London was signed by ten states such as Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the UK. Finland became the member o f the Council o f Europe only in 1989. The idea that the neutral position o f Finland was guaranteed by international treaty and was not part o f international law as a product o f the WWII is widely discussed [1]. Here the Treaty o f Friendship, cooperation and mutual assistance signed in 1948 by Finland and the Soviet Union is meant. All these examples just illustrate that the states o f the Northern Europe were active participants o f the majority o f the integration processes in Europe, but what was the situation with strictly Nordic cooperation and integration? The processes o f creation both the conditions for regional stability and the Northern European identity were the evolution o f existing institutions and the construction o f new regional ones. The institutionalization processes o f new interaction forms among the Northern European countries are considered as ways o f increasing regional stability and security. Analyzing the economic and political integration within this article it is important to understand that when we talk about northern countries first o f all we imply the European model consisting o f welfare countries based on social democracies and this fact could not have any influence o f integration processes. The European model based on such fundamental purposes o f social protection as guarantee o f a living standard consistent with human dignity and access to health care, social integration itself and the maintenance o f a reasonable standard o f living for people who cannot work any longer is widely implemented nowadays. European northern welfare states grow increasingly similar with deepening integration, given that regional integration reduces economic differences among national economies in Europe [2]. Most recent studies on the welfare states have focused exclusively on a single set o f challenges to the welfare state either consequences o f globalization or domestic challenges, such as demographic changes. As a result, existing studies have not to date examined how the different internal and external challenges to the welfare state relate to one another, and how they impact the political ability o f governments to enforce public policies. To evaluate accurately the future prospects o f the Northern European welfare states, one must take into account both the direct and indirect effects o f “internal” and “external” constraints on welfare provisions and their impact on the capacity o f states [3]. The process o f tighter international integration is by some taken to imply that welfare states have to be rolled back, while others point to this as strengthening the need for welfare state activities. These issues are increasingly brought to the forefront in policy debates on the welfare state, but also in many cases shaping views on the pros and cons of international integration. It is indisputable that international integration is proceeding at a rapid pace and that it changes economic structures, and therefore in turns both the scope and need for welfare state activities. It is also necessary to take into account the differences between countries o f the Northern Europe connected to the way o f welfare policies working out. For instance, integration strategies of Sweden and Norway are quite different from the Danish one as Denmark tries to involve a major part o f the private sector in welfare services and implies flexicurity model within the labor market. Iceland is considerably different from the other Nordic countries, as access to welfare services is to a large extent based on the “welfare-to-work” principle. In Finland, the voluntary sector has played a significant role in providing care for the elderly. In Norway, public-sector provision o f welfare services has been more dominant than elsewhere [4]. But it is really significant to note that all these differences in welfare policies are not obstacles on the ways of 71