The Nuances of Geopolitics in the Arctic (original) (raw)
Related papers
This dissertation will seek to analyse the respective positions of the five ‘Arctic states’ and their policies with regard to the High Northern latitudes of the planet. These five states are Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia and the USA. Each one of these states has specific and unique characteristics that define and develop their respective policies. This dissertations maintains that whilst the Arctic as a geopolitical space attracts the attention of individuals and organisations from around the world it is fundamentally and undeniably altered and interpreted by these five states and their respective capabilities beyond the influence or ability of any and all other entities save nature. This dissertation does not seek to interpret or deconstruct the legitimacy of states or their right to exist although the relationship between the entity of the state and the Arctic as the natural physical world is observed in the Introduction. From analysis grounded inside the real and functional paradigms of state power and its projection inside the physical space of the Arctic this paper seeks knowledge in interpreting what is important to the ‘Arctic Five’ and how their outlooks, policies and actions have shaped and will shape the Arctic. This dissertation recognises two established and mainstay theories of international relations namely: Realism and Liberalism. The purpose and aim of this paper is to determine with good evidence and reason the nature of state relations within the Arctic and if the political precedent adheres to one theory over the other. However the argument and analysis followed should not entertain exclusion of either theory or discount the value afforded by other, revisionist, readings of international relations theory. Without complication the goal is to identify which pattern takes precedent in the Arctic: state driven strategy or new cooperation. Each of the five Arctic states is taken as its own unique case. Each state has coastline within the Arctic Circle and every state is researching and planning submissions to the Commission on Continental Shelf Extension under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. However, although the states interact and acknowledge each other’s presence and rights within the Arctic each has evaluated the space in a different way. Therefore each state specific chapter looks at the core driving factors behind each state’s Arctic policy and behaviour. These variables are extensive and do not lie easily within traditional political or economic paradigms. This reality renders well the difficulties of Arctic study in the frame of broader, global geopolitical analyses. The finite and delicate environmental nature or the region promotes the constant of uncertainty that has matriculated from scientific/climatic analyses to underpin technological, economic, political and social realities at all levels. Parallel to this is the reality of empty space. The Arctic is barely inhabited and state frameworks, both tangible and theoretical, easily perish in such an unforgiving and remote environment. This paper also includes a chapter on the impact of UNCLOS and the Arctic Council in the region. These forums hold particular and specific relevance to the Arctic and have been prevalent in the respective state policy formulations. Both provide international windows in the Arctic. The Arctic Council is heavily referenced in Arctic policies and viewed as a legitimate forum for state interaction and understanding in the Arctic. UNCLOS also provides a legal framework consistent with normative international law that has led to a previously unseen level of bathymetric data collection as states attempt to map out the possible extent of their underwater continental shelves for submission to international law and the creation of recognised sovereignty and the natural hydrocarbon wealth this entails. Scientific research and finding in the Arctic is extensive and much publicised. This paper will not seek to interpret or drawn down findings from these beyond an understanding that the Arctic is threatened by, and overtly vulnerable to, climate change, that the ice cap is shrinking and that human exploitation of the High North may take a substantial and irreversible toll on the fragile environment there. These realities provide the framework, structure and analysis of this dissertation accordingly. Any form of political analysis of the Arctic will inherently focus on the Arctic Five states as the region’s ‘power containers’ (Giddens). Their interaction and operation in the High North is our medium of understanding.
Geopolitics and International Governance in the Arctic
Arctic Governance: Volume 1, 2017
The Arctic has been the object of heated political discussion in recent years as the region has evolved from a potential conflict zone during the Cold War to an arena for international cooperation immediately afterwards. Since the mid-2000s attention has once again focused on the conflict potential of the Arctic, this time related to its resources. This article looks at how the research literature balances its prospects. The literature on international relations (IR) in the Arctic has been mainly empirical in orientation, although framed in the major IR traditions of realism (traditional geopolitics), institutionalism and (to a lesser extent) constructivism. The English-language literature on Arctic politics, which naturally dominates the field globally, is by and large framed in institutional terms. The discussion is not whether institutions matter in Arctic politics, but how they best can be crafted in order to maintain peace and stability in the region. Speculations about a 'scramble for the Arctic' have more or less unanimously been refuted in the literature. The French literature, on the other hand, is largely framed in a geopolitical context. French geopolitics is less concerned with the global power game than with the rivalry between states for strategic resources. The institutions of cooperation are, however, downplayed.
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Three Levels of Arctic Geopolitics
2020
Few places have been the source of as much speculation, hype, and sweeping statements as the Arctic region at the start of the 21st century. Ever since 2006–07, a continuous narrative has portrayed the High North as the next arena for geopolitical conflict—the place where Russia, the United States, NATO, and eventually China are bound to clash. Propelled to the top of the international agenda by Russian flag-planting stunts and U.S. resource appraisals as much as the growing global concern for climate change, the Arctic keeps luring researchers and journalists northwards. It is here they expect the next “big scramble” to take place.1
ARCTIC - A REGION OF DISSONANT INTERNATIONAL INTERESTS.
The enduring global warming has opened new views of exploitation of the Arctic. The possibility to open new ship routes, huge resource reserves, and fishery are of interest of many entities, however experts’ opinions still differs. Although the cooperation between the nations has been peaceful, the military presence in the area is increasing and it remains to be seen how the recent Ukrainian crisis will affect the development in the area. As for now, no major conflicts in this area are likely and cooperation is supported by international treaties (e.g. UNCLOS) and organizations (e.g. the Arctic Council). There are several international disputes and also perils related to the Russian Federation, being major player there. Russia builds multidimensional capabilities, including military and economy ones, to support national interests. The Western sanctions are negatively influencing exploration of natural resources making Moscow nervous and it country must be treated very seriously to avoid creating new “Cold war” type icy relations and confrontation.
The Arctic: Numerous Interests and Multiple Players
Torun International Studies
The article attempts to present what seems to be of critical importance to the planet in terms of the influence on the life of all of us, namely the current changes occurring in the Arctic, as well as tries to show how complex the issue is. The work also tries to prove that the leading entity governing the Arctic, i.e. the Arctic Council is slowly turning into another unmanageable institution, not unlike the United Nations. In addition, the work endeavors to describe briefly the extremely aggressive policy of China towards the Arctic, a fairly new country with the permanent observer status in the Arctic Council wishing rather desperately to obtain a "chunk of the pie" in the division of Arctic riches, seemingly targeting especially Greenland as of late. The author attempts to present the complexity of international relations and diversified interests of separate countries and organizations, as well as evaluates some potential developments in the Arctic geopolitical sphere.
The Arctic: Potential for Conflict amidst Cooperation
Strategic Analysis, 2013
Changes in the Arctic topography due to climate change have resulted in the region, which erstwhile was remote with little accessibility, to being accessible with potential natural resources and attractive navigable sea areas. The prospects have also influenced the strategic contours of the Arctic and brought in many actors that view the region as a resource-rich area with viable commercial interests. The Arctic is considered a stable region due to tacit understandings, mutual trust and well established mechanisms. However, there are underlying stress points that cannot be ignored and these include a growing dependency on the region to fuel national energy and a slow militarisation of the region brought about by nations shifting focus on their Arctic military capabilities and capacities. article will examine the growing, albeit slow militarisation that could lead to potential conflict despite the growing cooperation in the Arctic.
"The Arctic as a Geopolitical Bond among the European Union, Norway and Russia"
If there is a place of common ground between the European Union and Russia, it is on the fields of energy, environment and migration. The Arctic binds together the EU with its two major energy suppliers, Norway and Russia. These three actors are also bound together by common efforts to protect the Arctic environment. Moreover, the recent migration crisis in Europe not only rattled the foundations of the Schengen treaty but also raised tensions between Norway and Russia especially at their borders. After two world wars, Europe has sought for stability. Moving forward from the difficult past, geopolitical issues were put to the side, but it was Ukraine that violently reintroduced geopolitics in European international relations. This paper seeks to analyse the common – and not so common – ground of these three major actors on contemporary Arctic issues. Energy exploitation and distribution, environmental protection and migration flows are the new geopolitical data of the “European” Arctic. With my research, I want to present the Arctic as an example of cooperation and mutual understanding rather than a boiling pot. I am going to argue that violence is not inherent to geopolitics but, as the name itself implies, geopolitics explain how politics and international relations are affected by both human and physical geographical factors. The last point that I will make is that geopolitical analysis is crucial for identifying important underlying issues that could lead to political, military or economic destabilisation if disregarded.
Journal of politics and law, 2010
It is a well-known fact that global warming is melting the Arctic ice cap. As this happens, the natural resources in the Arctic will become available for exploitation. As such, the five countries with major claims to the region-the United States, Canada, Russia, Denmark, and Norway-are looking to extend their claims to the natural resources beneath the ice-covered ocean. The size of the Arctic Shelf is about 4.5 million square kilometers, and the U.S. Geological Survey posits that 25 percent of the world's undiscovered gas and oil reserves may be there. Clearly, there are large amounts of untapped resources that these five countries could use to satisfy their increasing demand for development and economy. This paper will try to explore the current disputes over Arctic seabed resources surrounding the five states in North Pole, evaluate the regimes for resolving the conflict in UNCLOS. Furthermore, the paper will introduce the appropriate points of view and discuss the alternative dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) for this significant problem caused by global warming in the coming future.
The Arctic Frontier in International Relations
This essay provides the reader and practitioner key political and International Law information about the Arctic region and Arctic Ocean in particular, focusing on the interplay between competing Arctic nations (" Arctic 5 " , or the Arctic Council as " Arctic 8-to-12 "), their legal sovereignty claims and treaties, pending legal claims, navigation, Arctic business, regional pollution and Arctic relations among littoral and regional states from the Cold War to today's post-Cold War. Together this information serves also as basis for a College course on Arctic Affairs. Craig, K. W. (2016). Arctic Frontier in International Relations. Florida Political Chronicle, 25(1), 85-107. ISSN: 1549-1323 (online)