Economics and politics of “old confrontation” in the New Arctic

The modern Arctic is becoming the strategic space and area of competition of many powers, the arena of political confrontations between Arctic and non-Arctic states. Arctic research has moved from the sphere of science to the sphere of geopolitics and geoeconomics and is of strategic importance in the system of national security. Climatic fluctuations in the Arctic have increased the availability of hydrocarbon, biological and other resources, and improved ice conditions in the water area of the Northern Sea Route. The study analyzes the Arctic policy of Western European and North American countries in the conditions of the “New Arctic”. An overview of strategic documents on ensuring the spatial development.

European Union and Cooperation in the Arctic Council

Since 2008, the European Union has unsuccessfully tried to obtain permanent observer status in the Arctic Council, the central cooperation forum in the Arctic. The analysis shows that the EU's failures in this area are connected both with its location mostly outside of the region and remoteness from the northern realities, as well as global geopolitical tensions. However, the EU has had de facto observer ad hoc status since 2013, allowing it to participate in almost all formats of interaction in the Arctic Council. Considering this fact, the permanent observer status has rather a symbolic meaning and is equivalent to joining a kind of “privileged Arctic club”. An analysis of the EU's functioning in its relations with the Arctic Council and its members shows that the EU is ready to adapt and listen to the opinion of the Arctic countries in order to become a legitimate Arctic actor. The Arctic Council is of uneven importance for the different EU member states: Denmark, Finland and Sweden are full members, several countries are permanent observers, but most EU countries are not interested in the Arctic issues. Because of this multifaceted nature, the collective EU is more of an extra-regional player on the platform, but one with serious Arctic claims. The EU is actively working on a common Arctic policy. It is represented in the Arctic Council by the Ambassador-at-Large for Arctic Affairs, introduced in 2017, who acts in coordination with the European Commission and the member states concerned. The EU's overall approach is not unsuccessful: it has managed to engage more member states on the Arctic vector, and European expertise and input on sustainable development issues is already becoming an integral part of the AC's work and promises to evolve further.

Assessing Japan’s Arctic Engagement during the ArCS Project (2015–2020)

As Japan is considered a non-regional actor in Arctic governance, this paper begins with analysing how Japan navigates the web of Arctic governance and how it manages to create a coherent Arctic narrative and engages with the Arctic both inside and outside the region. The present research argues that the construction of an Arctic identity is a praxis performed through time that needs to be constantly reaffirmed. To illustrate this point, the paper then uses a lateral rather than linear approach to assess the influence of the Arctic on Japan at present. This paper assesses Japan’s engagement on the main stage where Arctic governance is performed (i.e. The Arctic Council) since the release of Japan’s Arctic Policy and under the Arctic Challenge for Sustainability project, Japan’s flagship program for Arctic research. Looking to the future, countries such as Japan who are willing to be involved in all parts of Arctic governance will have to make a choice about what kind of Arctic relationships they want to create and in which of these relationships Japan could invest more.

China’s Arctic Policy: Challenges to Regional Security (1990s – 2020s)

The article analyzes the evolution of China's Arctic policy, which has expanded over three decades from individual polar research to observer status in the Arctic Council and the existence of a state Arctic strategy. China and Russia have established mutually beneficial cooperation in the Arctic region in such conditions, when in many areas there are fundamental contradictions between the countries. The West did not have a long-term strategy capable of responding to current security challenges, including in the Arctic. When Russia tried to regain lost positions on the world stage in 2007-2008, China became an increasingly influential player in the world. If before the Arctic had been outside the lines of rivalry for decades, the question of the Far North as an arena of military competition began to take first place. China has become a long-term threat to both the United States and Russia. In previous years, with the help of the China, Moscow had the opportunity to receive the necessary investments and technologies for large-scale Arctic projects. The more Beijing attempts to establish itself as an influential player in the Arctic, the more the threat to other Arctic countries will grow. The Russian Federation has positioned itself as a leader in the region. The country's policy was aimed at strengthening this status through regional control and expansion of the military presence. This led to a response from the United States and NATO countries. In Russia it was assessed as a threat. The question arises as to what the strategy of the United States should be, and whether it will be possible to resist the costly arms race. If not, then the competition will be concentrated in the political and economic spheres. A particular aspect is the rapid militarization of the Arctic region after 2014, primarily due to changes in Russia's military strategy, which extends to the North. This has led to the tensions between the United States and Russia. China has not yet resorted to expand its military power in the Arctic. China's policy of economic and infrastructural influence is opposed to military methods. The effectiveness of Chinese non-military methods of influence is assessed

May China Fish in the Arctic Ocean?

In addition to the traditional so-called Arctic states, non-Artic states and some other international organisations are now showing a growing interest in this area. China, for example, has achieved some progress, since becoming an Arctic Council permanent observer, through participation in resource development in the region and strengthening its bilateral relations with the Arctic states. The present study examines China’s Arctic policy and its implications for the governance of the Arctic Ocean. It also provides an insight into the existing relevant international legal instruments and examines China’s interest in the participation, governance, and resource protection activities in the Arctic Ocean region, to successfully implement Chinese Arctic policy. To this end, the study examines the connection between the “white paper” and “China’s Arctic Policy”, in the context of executing the “Belt and Road Initiative”, in particular the “Arctic Silk Road”. The study concludes that China intends to perform a dynamic role in governing the Arctic Ocean, as a less challenging but cooperative partner in this region.

Approaches to Interstate Interaction of Circumpolar Countries in the Development of the Arctic

Purpose: is to suggest recommendations on the problems of cooperation of circumpolar countries in the Arctic based on the analysis and accumulates the existing economic concepts of interstate interaction.Methods: the work used the methods of classification, induction and deduction, generalization, structuring, statistical and logical analysis, system analysis, algorithmization. The research is based on the using the elements of empirical and theoretical methods for economic reality research.Results: the study presents the development of theoretical approaches to issues of interstate interaction in existing economic schools. The authors studied the experience of interstate cooperation in sphere of Arctic territory exploration and development. Based on basic theories, the existing theoretical and practical approaches of interstate interaction of circumpolar countries are summarized. Taking into account the dynamics of foreign trade turnover of circumpolar countries, the authors suggested the model of interstate interaction.Conclusions and Relevance: the development of conceptual provisions for interstate interaction for Arctic development allows us to take into account the main arising risks of the development process. It should be noted, that the main basic conceptual point of interstate interaction of countries in sphere of the Arctic development is the factor of "economic person" behavior within the neoclassical theory. This approach allows us to take into account the possibilities of interstate interaction, both from the point of view of openness of economic systems, and from the point of view of conflicts of interests of participants and the consequences of climate change. The suggested dynamic model of circumpolar countries interaction is based on the factors of multi-sided cooperation of various stakeholders as the main institution for the development of Arctic policy of circumpolar countries. It allows to consider the main risks arising during the of Arctic territories development.

Russia and USA in their Rivalry for Arctic: New Stage

The article relates to the geopolitical rivalry in the Arctic unwound in the recent years between the United States and Russia. Both countries claim leading positions here considering the Arctic as a region where the commercial production of hydrocarbon resources is eventually possible. Climate change breaks new ground for the shipping development in the Arctic. It stands to reason that Russia and the United States have redoubled their attention to the Arctic merchant shipping development and are enhancing naval vessels commissioning. Russia and the United States have made significant progress in this regard. However, changes in world politics, growth of contradictions in the world economy have led to stepping up policy of Russia and the United States in the Arctic. To defend their interests, Russia and the United States adopted a series of documents indicating the Arctic policy avenues. The article examines both Russia and the United States approaches to the policy implementation in the Arctic, as well as the future challenges facing the countries. The author finds that the geopolitical rivalry between the leading Arctic states for the Arctic will continue. Being unable to establish commercial production in the Arctic, Russia and the United States will implement the increased focus on the military sphere. The creation of the necessary military infrastructure, the construction of new vessels will become a key objective for both states. In addition, Russia and the United States will expand support for Arctic shipbuilding, which is seen as the main instrument for promoting their economic interests.

Singapore and the Arctic: Is the Gibraltar of the East Going to Materialize its Geopolitical Ambitions?

The Arctic is becoming the new place to be for states, companies and academics, as the ice retreat is uncovering new strategic and geopolitical stakes. Arctic sates have already updated their Arctic policies, including their geopolitical stakes and Asian states with an Observer status to the Arctic Council are following the trend, but few of them don’t have an Arctic policy yet, Singapore being one of them. Highly participative within the Arctic Council’s working groups and building a strong cooperation, Singapore still remains mysterious in its approach. Then, what are the Gibraltar of the East’s geopolitical ambitions in the Arctic?