The Arctic Council: the US chairmanship (first results)

The Arctic region’s smallest states and home-rule entities are clustered around the North European/ North Atlantic gateway. Small states in general are considered to need external ‘shelter’ from other states or institutions when faced with multi-functional security challenges beyond their own capacities. Arctic opening as a result of climate change will – even without conflict or excessive militarization – force local small actors to review their ‘hard’ security policies; will offer economic opportunities but also temptations and risks; and will create or aggravate various functional security challenges that demand multilateral cooperation. Case-by-case discussion of the various (groups of) small Northern actors reveals that their Arctic agendas vary subtly, and their preferred ‘shelter’ solutions sometimes not so subtly. Up to now, Arctic considerations have highlighted rather than overcoming variations in states’ basic stances vis-a-vis the obvious protectors: the us, nato and eu. However all small players close to the region agree on the value of ‘softer’ neighbourhood organizations like the Arctic Council, and are working to strengthen their own (broadly defined) security cooperation. The extra issue of independence arises for the Faroes, Greenland and Scotland. Despite all such complications, the overall value of having peace-minded small states engaged in the Arctic game probably outweighs the practical drawbacks.

Download Full-text

The United States and the making of an Arctic nation

Polar Record ◽

10.1017/s0032247418000219 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 54 (2) ◽

pp. 95-107 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Annika E. Nilsson

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

United States ◽

Policy Development ◽

Regional Cooperation ◽

Global Climate ◽

The United States ◽

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Council ◽

The Us ◽

Over Time

ABSTRACTThe United States has sometimes been called a reluctant Arctic actor, but during its chairmanship of the Arctic Council (2015–2017) the US engaged as an active proponent of Arctic cooperation, using the region as a showcase for strong global climate policy. This paper places US Arctic policy development during the Obama presidency within a longer time perspective, with a focus on how US interests towards the region have been formulated in policies and policy statements. The paper uses frame analysis to identify overarching discourses and discusses the extent to which certain themes and political logics recur or shift over time. It highlights economic development and national competitiveness as a prominent recurring frame, but also that the policy discourse has moved from nation-building and military security towards a broader security perspective, with attention to energy supply for the US, and more recently also to the implications of climate change. Over time, there is a clear shift from reluctance towards Arctic regional cooperation to embracing it. Moreover, it highlights how different stands in relation to climate change have affected Arctic cooperation in the past and may do so again in the future.

Download Full-text

U.S. and the Arctic in the Last Two Decades

Slovak Journal of Political Sciences ◽

10.1515/sjps-2016-0010 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 16 (2) ◽

pp. 190-206

Author(s):

Roman S. Czarny

Keyword(s):

Cold War ◽

Focal Point ◽

The United States ◽

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Council ◽

Track Record ◽

The Us ◽

United Nations Convention ◽

The Cold War ◽

International Instruments

Abstract The United States became an Arctic country by virtue of purchasing Alaska from Russia in 1867. For a variety of reasons, discussed in this work, the Arctic used to be a focal point for the US during the Cold War, but later on this country paid much less attention to the region, including somewhat dubious awareness of America actually being an Arctic state. The aim of this article is to present some opportunities and challenges posed by governing the Arctic, and in particular a brief outline of the U.S. approach towards the region through its track record in the span of about last two decades, until the year 2015. It also attempts to present the expectations connected with American chairmanship of the Arctic Council, as well as the reasons for the country’s inability to ratify one of the fundamental international instruments, i.e. the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS.

Download Full-text

Diplomacy and the Arctic Council by Danita Catherine Burke

International Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis ◽

10.1177/0020702021994657 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 76 (1) ◽

pp. 165-168

Author(s):

Wilfrid Greaves

Keyword(s):

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Council

Download Full-text

Russia’s cooperation with Asian observers to the Arctic Council

The Polar Journal ◽

10.1080/2154896x.2021.1892833 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-24

Author(s):

Yana Leksyutina

Keyword(s):

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Council

Download Full-text

How Does the Arctic Council Support Conservation of Arctic Biodiversity?

Sustainability ◽

10.3390/su12125042 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 12 (12) ◽

pp. 5042

Author(s):

Tom Barry ◽

Brynhildur Daviðsdóttir ◽

Níels Einarsson ◽

Oran R. Young

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Sustainable Development ◽

Environmental Protection ◽

Indigenous Communities ◽

The Arctic ◽

Arctic Council ◽

National Interests ◽

Conflicting Demands ◽

Agent Of Change ◽

Insight Into

The Arctic Council is an intergovernmental forum promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among Arctic states, indigenous communities, and peoples on issues of common importance. The rising geo-political importance of the Arctic and the onset of climate change has resulted in the Council becoming a focus of increasing interest from both inside and beyond the Arctic. This has resulted in new demands placed on the Council, attracting an increasing number of participants, and instigating a period of transformation as Arctic states work to find a way to balance conflicting demands to improve the Council’s effectiveness and take care of national interests. This paper considers whether, during this time of change, the Council is having an impact on the issues it was formed to address, i.e., environmental protection and sustainable development. To provide answers, it looks at how the Council reports on and evaluates progress towards the implementation of recommendations it makes regarding biodiversity, how it identifies where activities have had impacts and uncovers the mechanisms through which they were successful, to provide an insight into how the Arctic Council can be an agent of change.

Download Full-text

Energy outlook for the Arctic: 2020 and beyond

Polar Record ◽

10.1017/s0032247415000625 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 52 (2) ◽

pp. 170-175 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Graça Ermida

Keyword(s):

Oil And Gas ◽

Oil Prices ◽

The Arctic ◽

Hydrocarbon Production ◽

Arctic Circle ◽

The Us ◽

Energy Issues

ABSTRACTAt least four littoral countries have Arctic strategies that address energy issues. However, US, Canada, Russia and Norway strategies up to 2020 and beyond, reveal different interests in exploring Arctic resources. While Arctic oil and gas are of strategic importance to Russia and to Norway, Canada and the US seem content with continuing their current extraction predominantly south of the Arctic Circle. Despite the different approaches, the outcomes seem strangely similar. Indeed, despite the hype concerning the Arctic in the last decade, and for very diverse reasons, it is unlikely that any of these four countries will increase hydrocarbon production in the Arctic during the period under analysis. This was true even before the recent drop in oil prices. For all its potential, it is unclear what lies ahead for the region.

Download Full-text

The present and future competence of the European Union in the Arctic

Polar Record ◽

10.1017/s0032247411000295 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 48 (4) ◽

pp. 361-371 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Timo Koivurova ◽

Kai Kokko ◽

Sebastien Duyck ◽

Nikolas Sellheim ◽

Adam Stepien

Keyword(s):

International Negotiations ◽

The Arctic ◽

The European Union ◽

Crucial Importance ◽

Arctic Council ◽

The Third ◽

Broad Array ◽

The Subject ◽

Arctic Policy ◽

The Eu

ABSTRACTThe European Union's (EU's) intention of becoming a permanent observer in the Arctic Council and the reluctance of Arctic actors to grant it that status have made the union's aspirations in the Arctic the subject of a continuing debate. The discussion appears to be dominated by geographical considerations and the EU's gradually emerging Arctic policy. This article puts forward a different view of the EU's presence in the region, one drawing on an analysis of relevant EU competences. As a complex international actor, the EU has acquired a broad array of decision-making powers from its member states, powers that partly extend to Iceland and Norway via the EEA Agreement. Moreover, the EU has in many cases become a relevant actor in international negotiations and treaty making processes the outcomes of which are of crucial importance for the governance of the Arctic. Our argument in the third and concluding section is that only by including the EU in Arctic governance can the international community provide better prospects for the union to sensitise its policies and discourses to the Arctic realities and for other Arctic actors to understand how the union functions. This argument is supported by an analysis of the EU's restrictions on the import of seal products and the ensuing litigation.

Download Full-text