scholarly journals Multilateralism and Arctic Sovereignty: Canada’s Policy Options

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 39-47
Author(s):  
Andrew Gibson
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Military Power ◽  
Policy Options ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Unclos

This paper will examine Canada’s policy options regarding Canadian sovereignty over the Arctic Ocean, and will recommend a policy of multilateral engagement. Canada claims full sovereignty over the Arctic Archipelago and its surrounding waters, as well as a more limited form of sovereignty in parts of the Arctic Ocean. There is significant strategic, environmental, and economic value to uncontested Canadian control of these waters. However, these claims are not recognized by other states and contravene accepted international rules laid out in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). As Canada lacks the infrastructure and military power to effectively assert control of the region, as well as the diplomatic power to make other states recognize Canada’s claim, Canada should abandon its unilateral stance and pursue its claim through existing multilateral options: the UNCLOS and the Arctic Council. 

scholarly journals Mapping of the maritime jurisdiction for Arctic Navigation

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Haiyan Liu ◽  
Xiaoping Pang
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Route Planning ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Arctic Navigation ◽  
Navigation Planning ◽  
International Conventions

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> In recent years, Arctic glaciers have gradually melted due to the global warming, which makes the exploitation of Arctic and its seabed resources possible. Though numerous disagreements and potentials over Arctic maritime jurisdiction still exist, the surround-Arctic nations have agreed the United Nations' Convention on the Law of the Sea to divide the Arctic Ocean into zones that can be regulated and exploited. The IBRU of Durham University has mapped the known claims, agreed boundaries and potential claims of the surround-Arctic nations in the Arctic to clear the maritime jurisdiction in the region. However, different countries may have different requirements within their jurisdictional areas. Clarifying these requirements is essential for Arctic Navigation of investigation ships and merchant ships for their route planning.</p><p>In this paper, based on the map of maritime jurisdiction and boundaries in Arctic region (IBRU), we analysed the international conventions and relevant laws of the surround-Arctic nations to find out the rights and obligations of ships in different zones. The limitations on activities and recommendations on navigation planning are marked for different zones according to different purposes, i.e. science or commerce. The map could not only provide navigational guidance for the activities in the Arctic Ocean, but offer references for the countries not surrounding the Arctic in the formulation of the Arctic strategies.</p>

scholarly journals Arktisk råds rolle i polarpolitikken

Nordlit ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torbjørn Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Foreign Policies

This article discusses what role(s) member governments want the Arctic Council to have in Arctic affairs. It compares the foreign policies of the five littoral states of the Arctic Ocean: Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia, and the United States. It identifies and examines three determining debates on a ministerial level over the Arctic Council and the issues it might address: The first debate preceded the Arctic Council's creation in 1996; the second thrived as the five Arctic littoral states convened in Ilulissat, Greenland in 2008; and the third followed a political shift inthe United States in 2009.

scholarly journals The Role of the Arctic Economic Council in the International Legal Framework of the Arctic Ocean Environmental Governing

2020 ◽  
pp. 6-26
Author(s):  
A. N. Vylegzhanin ◽  
N. V. Korchunov ◽  
A. R. Tevatrosyan
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
International Forum ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Economic Council

INTRODUCTION. The article covers the legal aspects of the establishment of a new international forum – the Arctic Economic Council – and its role in the existing international legal framework for governing the Arctic Ocean, including the Arctic seas. The status and the functioning of the said international forum, particularly with regard to the activities within its Working Groups, have been examined based on the analysis of the documents adopted by the forum since its establishment. Special attention has been paid to the legal analysis of the coordination of the newly established forum with the Arctic Council and the prospects of such institutional cooperation.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research done by the authors on the relevant documents released by the Artic Council, in the context of legal and scientific sources on the topic of the Arctic Ocean and its seas, as well as on the Reports of the Arctic Economic Council submitted to the Senior Officials of the Arctic Council, underlies this article. The article also takes into consideration political and legal research of the Arctic Council’s work, aimed at the sustainable development of the economic activities in the region, as well as respective archive documents from the electronic database of the Arctic Council, including relevant press releases.RESEARCH RESULTS. The Arctic Economic Council (AEC), established upon the initiative of the Arctic Council in 2014, is a new circumpolar business-forum, which aims at fostering the sustainable development of the Arctic region by substantive cooperation with the entrepreneurs, carrying out economic activities in the region or planning to do so. The new international organization has the potential to become an effective international legal mechanism to promote greener economies in the Arctic; meanwhile, the organization is yet to become a constructive platform for dialogue on fostering the economic activities in the region.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The AEC foundational documents determine the structure and the course of action of the organization. The article, nevertheless, suggests that the executives and the Secretary of this newly established international forum ensure that the business representatives, committed to conduct activities in the Arctic, seek to comply with the international environmental standards, applicable to the Arctic; particularly that, subject to the unique vulnerability of the Arctic environment, an exchange of best practices takes place. Moreover, in view of the increased shipping and growth of other marine activities in the region, the Arctic business standards not only need to be more environmentally oriented, but also take into account the possibility of diversifying the Arctic economy. The AEC could focus its efforts on enhancing the quality of the regional regulation of the economic activities in the Arctic, paying particular attention to the coordinated self-regulative measures of the legal entities in different countries. In this case, its activities may prove to be more relevant and effective.

scholarly journals Consultative meetings of non-Arctic states on the status of the Arctic

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-318
Author(s):  
Alexander N. Vylegzhanin ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Kienko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
New Instruments

The article, in the context of the contemporary status of the Arctic, examines the legal and political documents adopted by China, Japan and South Korea in regard to their arctic policy, including those agreed upon by these three States. The alarming reaction to such documents in the Arctic coastal states, firstly, in the USA and Canada, is also considered in the article. Relevant western scholars’ arguments are scrutinized, such as the increase of “China’s military power”; China’s “insatiable appetite” for access to natural resources in the Arctic; the argument that “China seeks to dominate” the Arctic and the situation when “the Arctic Council is split”; the notion that China makes other non-Arctic States create separate legal documents concerning the regime of the Arctic Ocean. The article concludes that the western interpretation of such documents is alarming only in relation to China. The research shows that up till now there are no grounds for such estimations of China’s negative role. However, statements by Chinese officials as cited in the article and some provisions stipulated in “China’s Arctic policy” contradict the common will of the Arctic coastal states in regard to the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean as reflected in the Ilulissat Declaration of 2008. In such a dynamic legal environment, new instruments of collaboration are in demand, which might involve China and other non-Arctic states in maintaining the established legal regime of the Arctic. Thus, the new instruments would deter the creation (with unpredictable consequences) by China, Japan and South Korea of new trilateral acts relating to the status of the Arctic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document