Best Drupal HostingBest Joomla HostingBest Wordpress Hosting

World Policy Journal is proud to share our weekly podcast, World Policy On Air, featuring former Newsweek On Air host David Alpern. Click here to subscribe on iTunes!



The Arctic: Cooperation or Confrontation?

By Erica Dingman

To most North Americans, the Arctic is a distant location—a land of frigid temperatures, pristine beauty, and polar bears. Few are aware that the Arctic is a literal (and littoral) crossroads of the 21st century, where concepts of state sovereignty and human and environmental security intersect with the challenges and opportunities related to climate change. And it is fast becoming one of the most geopolitically critical and ecologically unstable global regions, as the environmental consequences of climate change and the hunt for new energy sources challenge stakeholders to unravel the complexities of an emerging world. Rapid loss of sea ice, melting permafrost, and glaciers affect not only security defined broadly, but also raise the possibility of increased marine transportation for both commercial purposes and tourism. Increasing access to potential hydrocarbon deposits will further challenge stakeholders to address the concerns of commercial interests.

While this brief synopsis on the state of Arctic affairs may give the impression that we are headed for a heightened state of alert, the truth points towards a more cooperative future. Arctic nations have been working through unresolved boundary disputes. Scientific research is often conducted through collaborative cross-border missions. The exploitation of natural resources is increasingly being balanced against a desire to protect the environment. Cooperation has become a far greater driver in Arctic relations than rivalry and confrontation.

One example is that of the United States and Canada, who have had a longstanding dispute over where to draw the line defining their border in the Beaufort Sea. While each country uses different parameters to stake their claim, in the summer of 2010 the United States and Canada collaborated for the third consecutive year on mapping the seabed of the Beaufort Sea. Unlike prior years, the 2010 survey included a sonar probe of the contested area. The findings will be useful to representatives of both governments, who started talks in July 2010 aimed toward resolution of overlapping interests in the Beaufort.

Russia is also in the midst of resolving offshore boundary disputes. On September 15, 2010 Russia and Norway signed the bilateral Treaty Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Cooperation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean, after four decades of tough negotiation. Norway’s Parliament ratified the treaty in February 2011, and President Medvedev sent the Treaty to the State Duma, which is expected to ratify it. Several Russo-Norwegian joint military exercises are slated for this year, and the two states have pledged to protect the environment, keep fish stocks at a sustainable level, and possibly cooperate on the exploitation of trans-boundary oil deposits.

These cooperative efforts should serve as an example to other Arctic nations, demonstrating that difficult, drawn-out negotiations can result in a win-win outcome.  Within days of the Russia-Norway treaty, Foreign Ministers Sergei Lavrov and Jonas Gahr Støre jointly penned an article for the Toronto Globe and Mailtitled “Canada, take note: Here’s how to resolve maritime disputes.” The two ministers wrote that the experience created “enormous value” in terms of the bi-lateral relations and for the “international community at large.” They went on to say that “when states consider their interests in a long-term perspective, aiming for sustainable solutions” the potential advantages far outweigh the individual gains.

Yet this spirit of cooperation does not seem to apply when a significant non-state actor becomes involved in Artic issues. The Inuit, whose homelands include Alaska, Canada, Greenland and Russia, formed the Inuit Circumpolar Council [ICC] in 1977. The United Nations has recognized the ICC as a non-governmental organization. However, it is also a political actor. At the Arctic Council, which meets bi-annually, the ICC actively participates under the status of a Permanent Participant. However, in 2008, the Arctic coastal states (known as the Arctic Five)—Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Russian Federation and the United States—met outside the Council and produced a document known as the Ilulissat Declaration, in which the five states effectively appointed themselves the managers of the Arctic and explicitly rejected the concept of a “new comprehensive international legal regime” for the region.

Finland, Iceland, and Sweden expressed their displeasure, as did the ICC. Duane Smith, then the President of ICC Canada, called for the Inuit to have “a seat at the table.” The following year, the Inuit released A Circumpolar Inuit Declaration on Sovereignty in the Arctic, which was both a statement of indignation and a proposal for an alternative form of decision-making. The Declaration noted that “the 2008 Ilulissat Declarationon Arctic sovereignty by ministers representing the five coastal Arctic states did not go far enough in affirming the rights Inuit have gained through international law, land claims, and self-government processes.”

Specifically, the ICC cited the Arctic Five for disregarding their fiduciary obligations toward Inuit. Moreover, by meeting independently of the Arctic Council, the Arctic Five neglected the organization’s role as a forum for cooperative negotiations in matters concerning all Arctic nations and Arctic indigenous peoples. Inuit concerns are not necessarily incompatible with state interests, and the Inuit believe that Arctic policy-making should be built around partnership. 

Erica Dingman is a freelance writer and researcher whose work focuses on the Arctic, Inuit, and Canada/United States relations. She holds a Master's in International Affairs from The New School.

Photo courtesy of flickr user nasa hq photo.


Post new comment
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly. If you have a Gravatar account, used to display your avatar.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image. Ignore spaces and be careful about upper and lower case.


Around WPI

Jihad in Sub-Saharan Africa 

This paper, “Jihad in Sub-Saharan Africa: Challenging the Narratives of the War on Terror,” examines the history of Islamic movements in Africa's Sahel region to contextualize current conflicts.

World Economic Roundtable with Vicente Fox 

In this World Economic Roundtable, former Mexican President Vicente Fox discusses his current quest to make his country a hub for technology. 

Intern at World Policy

Want to join our team? Looking for an experience at one of the most highly sought-after internships for ambitious students? Application details here.


Al Gore presides over Arctic Roundtable 

As the United States prepares to assume chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2015, this inaugural convening of the Arctic Deeply Roundtables launches a vital conversation for our times. 


When the Senate Worked for Us:
New book offers untold stories of how activist staffers countered corporate lobbies in the U.S.

MA in International Policy and Development
Middlebury Institute (Monterey, CA): Put theory into practice through client-based coursework. Apply by Feb. 1.

Millennium Project’s State of the Future 19.0: Collective Intelligence on the Future of the World


To learn about the latest in media, programming, and fellowship, subscribe to the World Policy Weekly Newsletter and read through our archives.

World Policy on Facebook