Canadian-American Relations in the Arctic: The Effect of Environmental Influences upon Territorial Claims

1979 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 402-427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas M. Tynan
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The North ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
Canadian Foreign Policy ◽  
Territorial Claims ◽  
The One

Wallace K. Ferguson, the noted Renaissance scholar, once wrote that history must be seen through the eyes of the one writing it. He went on to say that, “since history is in this sense created by the historian, and he, in turn, is the product of his age and environment, history varies from generation to generation and must be constantly reinterpreted.” It is with this thought in mind that we will undertake a reexamination of the role of the Arctic in Canadian-American relations.In recent years the Arctic has become a region of growing significance for both the United States and Canada after decades of marginal interest bordering on neglect. It is this article's position that Canadian foreign policy, concerning the Arctic regions to the north of her mainland, has consistently from 1880 to 1970 been based upon a perception of potential threats, which in fact never existed. Furthermore, such a perception has been based in part upon the unsettled nature of international law in the Arctic and the effect of certain environmental factors, labeled as domestic sources of foreign policy in Dale Thomson and Roger Swanson's Canadian Foreign Policy: Options and Perspectives. The article, then, shows how Canadian foreign policy in this issue-area illustrates the Sprout's paradigm of perception in decision-making. According to this paradigm, “what matters in policymaking (and, of course, in analysis thereof) is how the human policymaker (or group) perceives, interprets and responds to the environing conditions and events.”

Arctic Exploration and International Law

1909 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 928-941
Author(s):  
James Brown Scott
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
United States Navy ◽  
The United States ◽  
North Pole ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The North ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
Arctic Exploration ◽  
Scientific Achievements

The announcement on September 1, 1909, by Dr. Frederick A. Cook, that he had discovered the north pole on April 21, 1908, and the almost contemporary declaration on September 6th, of Robert A. Peary, of the United States Navy, in command of the Roosevelt, that he had discovered the north pole on April 6, 1909, are, if substantiated, not only international events and scientific achievements of the greatest interest and value, but the culmination of centuries of effort, directed not merely to reach the pole, but to shorten commercial routes by the discovery of a northwestern and northeastern passage, to advance our knowledge of arctic geography and to make known in a disinterested and scientific spirit, the flora, fauna, and the physical configuration of the arctic regions.

scholarly journals Is Russia an Arctic Status Quo Power?

Politik ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Morten Larsen Nonboe
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
North Pole ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Russian Foreign Policy ◽  
The North ◽  
The Status

Russian foreign policy in the increasingly important Arctic region reflects an ambiguous combination of assertiveness and cooperation in accordance with international law. Against this background, the existing literature on the Arctic tends to polarise around revisionist and status quo interpretations of Russian foreign policy in the region. The present paper contrasts the divergent interpretations through case studies of the Russian flag planting on the North Pole seabed in 2007 and Russia’s participation at the Ilulissat Summit in 2008 which can be seen as ‘crucial’ cases for the competing interpretations. Overall, the case studies provide support for a modidied version of the status quo interpretation which incorporates insights from the revisionist interpretation. 

COMPARISON OF SOME CONSTITUTIONAL POSITIONS IN THE RUSSIAN ARCTIC ZONE AND THE USA STATE OF ALASKA

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Minina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Russian Arctic ◽  
Arctic Zone ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
The North ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
The Usa

The similarity of the regions of the Russian Arctic and the state of Alaska in the United States in the climate, geographical and geopolitical terms is obvious. However, at the same time there are many differences, in many ways determining the level and quality of life of the population of these territories. The historical retrospective of the development of Siberian and northern lands development by the Russian people, who reached the strait between Asia and America and colonized part of the territory of North America, about the successful beginning and end of this "company" stretching for two centuries, some understanding of the need to develop new lands for the Russian man individually and the state as a whole, the article refers. Considering the situation of modern Russia and the United States of America in terms of the sustainable development of the northern, Arctic regions of both countries, an attempt is made to find possible ways to improve the financial situation of the indigenous peoples of the North and the non-native inhabitants of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation by comparing constitutional approaches to socio-economic development and the area of environmental management of the Russian and American Arctic.

The Role of Domestic Courts in Effectuating International Law

1990 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 77-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry G. Schermers
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Public Attention ◽  
Domestic Courts

In his article on the implementation of international law by the domestic courts in the United States, Richard Falk focuses on the possible role of domestic courts with respect to the acts of foreign policy which may be contrary to international law. In general that role is limited. This is the same in Europe. Falk mentions efforts of individuals, to change national foreign policy by means such as the Russell Tribunal, boycotts of products, blocking of tracks and the occupation of buildings. Such activities also happen in Europe but rather with the intention to attract public attention than with the purpose to litigate in court. In Europe it is generally accepted that courts should not take policy decisions of that kind.

The role of the “North Atlantic Triangle” in the development of Canadian foreign policy: on the question of interpretations of the concept

2021 ◽  
pp. 329-340
Author(s):  
Nataliia Y. Zhukovskaya
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Great Britain ◽  
North Atlantic ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Interests ◽  
The North ◽  
Maximum Benefit ◽  
Canadian Foreign Policy ◽  
The North Atlantic

An analysis of various interpretations of the concept of the “North Atlantic Triangle” in the context of the development of Canadian foreign policy in the late 19th – first half of the 20th centuries is presented. The relevance of the work is due to the need to study the interaction of the Atlantic powers in historical dynamics, with an emphasis on the origins of the development of the “North Atlantic triangle”. Based on the classic works of Canadian historians and the works of modern researchers, the concept of the “North Atlantic Triangle” is analyzed through three main ideas: the “bookkeeper’s puzzle”, the idea of “counterweight” and the idea of a “bridge” or “linchpin”. It is concluded that the development of Canadian national interests began long before Canadians recognized themselves as a nation and gained the ability to pursue an independent foreign policy. This process was largely determined by a specific relationship between two centers of gravity: Great Britain and the United States. Canada was the weakest side of this construct, therefore, for reasons of security and the preservation of its own interests, it developed certain scenarios of relations with the Atlantic partners. Depending on historical circumstances, the emphasis in these scenarios was different. That is why interpretations of the concept of the “North Atlantic Triangle” often differ depending on the subject content and chronological boundaries of a particular study. However, it has been proven that the main goal setting of Canadian foreign policy priorities – to ensure their own security and derive maximum benefit from relations within the “North Atlantic Triangle”, skillfully smoothing out contradictions and maneuvering between Great Britain and the United States – remained unchanged.

Rights Over the Arctic

1930 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 703-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Lakhtine
Keyword(s):  
North America ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Far East ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The North ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
The Far East ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
The One

The transarctic flights of 1926 and 1928 demonstrate the possibility of establishing communication by air across the Arctic regions between Europe, on the one side, and North America and the Far East on the other. Quite aside from the saving of time owing to shorter distance, the establishment of such communication presents considerably less diiSculty than air communication over the Atlantic: a conclusion derived from the transatlantic flights of the last three years. The experience of the airship Italia in May, 1928, does not at all nullify this conclusion. It serves merely to show that the organization of transarctic communication requires special prearrangements, such aa wireless stations, meteorological stations, landing-places, air-bases, the construction of which on the shores, islands, and even on the ice of the Arctic Ocean, appears to be quite feasible. The necessity for such stations has aroused in the governments of the North countries an increased interest in the Arctic regions which heretofore has been restricted to scientific circles.

scholarly journals The Responsibility Dilemma The Role of the R2P in the U.S. Foreign Policy since the Rwanda Genocide

Ad Americam ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. 51-64
Author(s):  
Natalia Koper
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Post Cold War ◽  
The Public ◽  
Humanitarian Crises ◽  
Global Leader ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
Depth Study ◽  
The One

This paper explores the role of the doctrine of the responsibility to protect (R2P) in shaping U.S. foreign policy in the post-Cold War period. Based on the in-depth study of declassified documents, public speeches, and other documents, this paper examines three case studies (Rwanda genocide, Iraq war, Libya conflict) as representative examples of the U.S.involvement in humanitarian crises abroad. The analysis reveals a consistently evolving narrative of a country fatalistically balancing the dilemma of responsibility. On the one side, having assumed the role of a global leader and norm-carrier, the United States is expected to act accordingly, and intervene in foreign humanitarian crises, safeguarding nations facing grave and continuous violations of human rights. On the other hand, every administration has been faced with the possibility of a backlash from either the public opinion, which does not prioritize humanitarian causes abroad, or the international community, which is not indifferent to violations of the principle of state sovereignty. As a result, the humanitarian narrative, albeit important, has been mainly applied as a secondary resource, and has not been the primary reason for interventions, as demonstrated with a number of inconsistencies in formulating foreign policies and employing the R2P rhetoric.

Acorn and Oak

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Baldwin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
The United States ◽  
Berlin Wall ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The North ◽  
The One ◽  
The Cold War

To Parse The Subtle Distinctions between Europe and America must strike observers from other parts of the globe as an exercise in the narcissism of minor differences. Like twins keen to differentiate themselves, some nations eagerly distinguish among countries that are, seen globally, much of a muchness. During the cold war, the unity of the North Atlantic nations against the Soviet empire was obvious. But after the fall of the Berlin Wall, new antagonisms emerged. Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Israel: these are the immediate bones of contention. The larger issue has been the role of the United States, the one remaining superpower, as its regnum is tested by Middle Eastern wars, Russian saber rattling, and Chinese aspirations to great power status. Perhaps, as some Europeans argue, the United States has become a rogue state, unilaterally exempting itself from the strictures of mutual dependence in an increasingly interwoven world. Perhaps, as some Americans reply, Europeans live in a cloud-cuckoo land where conflict is considered ultimately to be based on misunderstandings, not real differences, and talk can therefore replace guns. These are geopolitical debates we need not enter into here. We are concerned, however, with the geopoliticians’ frequent and facile elisions between internal and external politics. Because Americans own guns, they like to go to war. Because they drive big cars, they need to secure oil supplies in the Middle East. Because they are religious, they see themselves as crusaders. Because continental Europeans do not have functioning armies and refuse to pay for any, they turn foreign policy into a talking shop. Because they spend their money on social benefits, they cannot afford to defend themselves and must therefore appease the aggressors. Because of their own traumatic past, they refuse to acknowledge the continuing reality of evil in the world. In this book, I have shown that, in almost every quantifiable respect, the United States and Western Europe approximate each other. Earlier, I have accounted for some of the ways that social scientists have tried, and failed, to typologize differences between Europe and America.

Innocent Passage in the Arctic

1968 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 3-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Donat Pharand
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Basic Question ◽  
Old Northwest ◽  
The North ◽  
Arctic Regions ◽  
The Right

The Arctic Regions have been a fascinating subject of study for a long time, mainly because of man’s strong desire to conquer the unknown. The military interest in those regions did not develop until recent years. With the straining of relations between the Soviet Union and the United States after World War II, the strategic significance of the Arctic soon became very real. This significance was appreciably diminished with the invention of intercontinental ballistic missiles but the more recent development of the nuclear missile-launching submarine has given the Arctic waters a new military importance. Of course, nuclear submarines could also be of considerable commercial interest. By borrowing the Arctic Ocean, merchant submarines could drastically shorten some of the present maritime trading routes. The exploitation of natural resources in the Arctic regions is already in process of giving new commercial meaning to the old Northwest and Northeast Passages. In the circumstances, an inquiry into the legal regime of the Arctic waters is timely. Two basic principles of the law of the sea are involved: the right of innocent passage, and the freedom of the seas. The present study will concentrate on the right of innocent passage. An investigation will be made into the legal status of the Arctic waters constituting what is commonly known as the Northwest Passage, on the North American side of the Pole, and the Northeast Passage or Northern Sea Route on the Soviet side. The basic question is whether or not the right of free and innocent passage in favour of foreign ships applies to those waters.

The North Atlantic Treaty in the United States Senate

1949 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 633-665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard H. Heindel ◽  
Thorsten V. Kalijarvi ◽  
Francis O. Wilcox
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Foreign Policy ◽  
North Atlantic ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Senate ◽  
The North ◽  
The North Atlantic

In joining the North Atlantic Treaty the United States made a momentous decision in its foreign policy. This article undertakes to analyze the rôle of the United States Senate in this historic step and to summarize the more important issues encountered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document