|
|
| (17 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| | | | |
| − | = '''Overview''' = | + | == Overview == |
| | + | [[File:DATE Arctic Territorial Claims Map.png|alt=Arctic borders|thumb|The maritime and territorial claims and exclusive economic zones of the ARctic nations.]] |
| | + | The Arctic region consists of the exclusive economic zones or territories of the United States (U.S.), Canada, Framland (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Torrike, Bothnia, Arnland, Otso, and Donovia. The Arctic Council defines non-Arctic nations as nations asserting interests in the Arctic, but otherwise not geographically inside the region. |
| | | | |
| − | The Arctic is an enormous area, sprawling over one sixth of the earth's landmass; twenty‐four time zones and more than 30 million square kilometers (km2).
| + | Eight countries ? Canada, Norway, Denmark, Bothnia, Otso, Donovia, Torrike, and the United States ? have Arctic territory, while five countries (Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Norway, Donovia, and the U.S.), known as the Arctic Five, have Arctic Ocean coastline. Of note, Donovia has the most expansive Arctic territory of any of these countries. |
| | | | |
| − | The Arctic is defined three ways: (1) a circle of latitude, (2) a temperature and Arctic marine boundary [AMAP], and (3) Arctic human development report [AHDR]. For the purposes of DATE Europe, the latitude definition is used. | + | The Arctic?s physical environment shapes the economic, social, and political environments. The region crosses numerous international jurisdictions, exclusive economic zones, national and international indigenous territories, and global commons. There is no single political body responsible for the entire region, although there are multiple permanent and ad hoc intergovernmental associations. Most of these organizations focus on science, environmental management, and safety. International organizations concerning the Arctic region include the United Nations (UN) International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Arctic Economic Council, the Arctic Council, the International Whaling Commission, and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) |
| − | [[File:The Arctic Ocean.png|thumb|454x454px|'''The Arctic Ocean''']]
| |
| | | | |
| − | The Arctic Circle is the most northerly of the five major circles of latitude as shown on maps of Earth. It marks the northernmost point at which the noon sun is just visible on the December solstice and the southernmost point at which the midnight sun is just visible on the June solstice. The region north of this circle is known as the Arctic, and the zone just to the south is called the Northern Temperate Zone or sub-Arctic.
| + | Some non-Arctic countries also maintain a presence for scientific and environmental research as well as to support their Arctic partners. Additionally, the global competition between great powers manifests in the Arctic, with the primary U.S. competitor being Donovia. The People?s Republic of Olvana (PRO) requested recognition as an "Arctic Country" by the Arctic Council. The Council instead granted Olvana observer status in May 2013. Olvana considers itself a ?near-Arctic? nation. |
| | | | |
| − | The position of the Arctic Circle is not fixed; as of 12 May 2018, it runs 66°33′47.1″ north of the Equator. Its latitude depends on the Earth's axial tilt, which fluctuates within a margin of 2° over a 40,000-year period, due to tidal forces resulting from the orbit of the moon. Consequently, the Arctic Circle is currently drifting northwards at a speed of about 15 meters (49 feet) per year.
| + | There are territorial disputes among various Arctic nations; these are stable at present but could be associated with increasing tension in the future. The most active intergovernmental associations in the Arctic are the Arctic Council, the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, and the Arctic Five. Participation in these organizations is determined by the presence of national boundaries in the Arctic region. |
| | | | |
| − | The Arctic is a region rather than a country, although some countries have territory there. These countries are the United States (U.S.), Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Norway, Torrike, Bothnia, Otso, and Donovia. The People’s Republic of Olvana (PRO) requested to be recognized as an Arctic country by the Arctic Council. PRO was granted observer status in May 2013 and considers itself a near-Arctic nation. The Arctic Council definition of non-Arctic nation describes nations asserting interests in the Arctic, but otherwise not geographically related to the region.
| + | == Governance == |
| | | | |
| − | According to Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, there are two forms of security concerns in the Arctic: military security of individual states and common security of multiple regional states.<blockquote>"Military security mostly comprises of jurisdiction and border related issues, while common security deals with threats of piracy, terrorism and environmental disasters in the region. Jurisdiction and border related issues take three major forms in the Arctic; those that are relating to continental shelves, those that focus on internal waterways, which tend to be multilateral in nature and those that are unsettled bilateral boundaries. Arctic countries retain military presences in the High North to project their influence in the region and to protect their national security. However, a national military presence cannot solve issues that warrant international cooperation. Capabilities to provide shipping protection, to mitigate environmental disasters, such as oil-spills, to deal with threats such as terrorism and smuggling are essential for common safety. These challenges necessitate cooperation among the Arctic states."</blockquote>Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states have the right to create an exclusive economic zone (EEZ). In this zone, the coastal state has exclusive right to explore and exploit natural resources of the sea as well as the seabed and its subsoil, and any other economic exploitation. The coastal state may also exercise environmental jurisdiction in the zone. The EEZ can extend to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (approximately 370 km).
| + | === The Arctic Council === |
| | + | The Arctic Council consists of the eight countries with Arctic territory and is the principal intergovernmental forum focused on conservation, safety, and development. By mandate, it is not a forum for security issues or territorial disputes. Member nations alternate chairing the Council. |
| | | | |
| − | Under Article 76 of UNCLOS, a coastal state has the possibility of extending its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles if within 10 years of the Convention coming into force for the state concerned, it can document to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) established pursuant to the Convention, that a number of scientific criteria are met. The coastal state will then have the right to living and non-living resources on and under the seabed beyond 200 nautical miles, subject to an obligation to make payments or contributions to the International Seabed Authority pursuant to Convention Article 82.
| + | The Arctic Council is the only circumpolar forum for political discussions at the government level. It was established in 1996 as a high-level forum to promote cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic states and their indigenous peoples. In addition to Working Groups, the Arctic Council has two primary task forces: the Task Force on Arctic Marine Cooperation (TFAMC) and the Task Force on Improved Connectivity in the Arctic (TFICA). The Arctic Council is active only in the political and economic variables of the Arctic. It does not include security policy or the military. |
| − | | + | {| class="wikitable" |
| − | Potential territorial disputes in the Arctic involve overlapping extended continental shelf claims. Donovia, Denmark, and Canada have all stated intent to extend their continental shelves northward under the guideline provided by UNCLOS, and their submitted claims overlap. In 2001, Donovia submitted a proposal claiming the Lomonsov Ridge was part of Donovia’s Continental Shelf. The territory claimed by Donovia in the submission is a large portion of the Arctic reaching the North Pole. In 2015, Donovia resubmitted a revised claim including years of additional data-gathering. Its claim now covers over 1,199,164.5 km2 (463,000 square miles) of sea shelf in the Arctic.
| + | |+Arctic Council |
| − | | + | |'''Member States''' |
| − | Besides maritime boundary issues, the Kingdom of Denmark has an unresolved issue relating to the sovereignty of Hans Island (Hans Ø) as both the Kingdom and Canada claim sovereignty over the island.
| + | |'''Observer States''' |
| − | | + | |- |
| − | International organizations concerning the Arctic region include the United Nations (UN) [http://www.imo.org/en/Pages/Default.aspx International Maritime Organization] (IMO), [http://www.arcticcircle.org/about/about/ The Arctic Circle], the [http://www.arctic-council.org/index.php/en/ Arctic Council], and the [https://iwc.int/home International Whaling Commission], and the [http://www.barentscooperation.org/en Barents Euro-Arctic Council] (BEAC).
| + | |United States (1996) |
| − | | + | |Germany (1998) |
| − | The Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) is the forum for intergovernmental cooperation on issues concerning the Barents Region. The BEAC meets at Foreign Ministers level in the chairmanship country at the end of term of office. The chairmanship rotates every second year, between Norway, Bothnia, Donovia and Torrike.
| + | |- |
| − | | + | |Canada (1996) |
| − | == '''Arctic Council''' ==
| + | |Netherlands (1998) |
| − | | + | |- |
| − | The Arctic Council is the only circumpolar forum for political discussions at government level. It was established in 1996 as a high-level forum to promote cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic states. In addition to Working Groups, the Arctic Council has two task forces: the [https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/1704 Task Force on Arctic Marine Cooperation] (TFAMC) and the [https://oaarchive.arctic-council.org/handle/11374/1909 Task Force on Improved Connectivity in the Arctic] (TFICA). | + | |Donovia (1996) |
| − | | + | |Poland (1998) |
| − | The member states are the U.S., Canada, Denmark (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Iceland, Norway, Torrike, Bothnia, Otso, and Donovia. The non-Arctic observer states are (as of 2013) France, Germany, India, Italy, PRO, Poland, Singapore, South Torbia, Spain, Switzerland, The Netherlands, and United Kingdom. | + | |- |
| − | [[File:Arctic Council member states.png|center|thumb|'''Arctic Council Member and Observer States''']]
| + | |Framland (1996) |
| − | | + | |United Kingdom (1998) |
| − | Thirteen Intergovernmental and Inter-Parliamentary Organizations have an approved observer status:
| + | |- |
| − | | + | |Torrike (1996) |
| − | # [http://www.ices.dk/pages/Contact.aspx International Council for the Exploration of the Sea] (ICES)
| + | |France (2000) |
| − | # [http://www.ifrc.org/ International Federation of Red Cross & Red Crescent Societies] (IFRC)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://www.iucn.org/ International Union for the Conservation of Nature] (IUCN)
| + | |Otso (1996) |
| − | # [http://www.norden.org/ Nordic Council of Ministers] (NCM)
| + | |Spain (2006) |
| − | # [http://www.nefco.org/ Nordic Environment Finance Corporation] (NEFCO)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://www.nammco.no/ North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission] (NAMMCO)
| + | |Bothnia (1996) |
| − | # [https://www.ospar.org/contact OSPAR Commission]
| + | |Olvana (2013) |
| − | # [http://www.arcticparl.org/ Standing Committee of the Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region] (SCPAR)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://www.unece.org/info/ece-homepage.html United Nations Economic Commission for Europe] (UN-ECE)
| + | |Arnland (1996) |
| − | # [http://www.undp.org/ United Nations Development Programme] (UNDP)
| + | |South Torbia (2013) |
| − | # [http://www.unep.org/ United Nations Environment Programme] (UNEP)
| + | |- |
| − | # [https://public.wmo.int/en/about-us/contact-us World Meteorological Organization] (WMO)
| + | |
| − | # [http://www.vestnordisk.is/vestnordiskrad/sekretariatet/ West Nordic Council] (WNC)
| + | |Gabal (2013) |
| − | | + | |- |
| − | Thirteen Non-governmental Organizations are approved Observers in the Arctic Council:
| + | |
| − | | + | |Himaldesh (2013) |
| − | # [http://www.acops.org.uk/ Advisory Committee on Protection of the Sea] (ACOPS)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://arctic.ucalgary.ca/ Arctic Institute of North America] (AINA)
| + | |
| − | # [http://www.reindeerportal.org/ Association of World Reindeer Herders] (AWRH)
| + | |Italy (2013) |
| − | # [http://www.circumpolar.org/ Circumpolar Conservation Union] (CCU)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://iasc.info/ International Arctic Science Committee] (IASC)
| + | |
| − | # [http://www.iassa.org/ International Arctic Social Sciences Association] (IASSA)
| + | |Japan (2013) |
| − | # [http://iuch.net/ International Union for Circumpolar Health] (IUCH)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://www.iwgia.org/ International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs] (IWGIA)
| + | |'''''' |
| − | # [http://www.nationalgeographic.com/contact/ National Geographic Society] (NGS)
| + | |South Korea (2013) |
| − | # [http://thenorthernforum.org/ Northern Forum] (NF)
| + | |- |
| − | # [http://oceana.org/about-oceana/oceana-international-offices Oceana]
| + | |'''''' |
| − | # [http://www.uarctic.org/Frontpage.aspx?m=3 University of the Arctic] (UArctic)
| + | |Singapore (2013) |
| − | # [http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/where_we_work/arctic/ World Wide Fund for Nature-Global Arctic Program] (WWF)
| + | |- |
| − | | + | |'''''' |
| − | Other NGOs concerned with Arctic issues, but not members of the Arctic Council include the following:
| + | |Switzerland (2017) |
| − | | + | |} |
| − | * [http://www.arctic.io/ Arctic.io]
| + | Six Arctic indigenous peoples? associations are permanent participants. The category of Permanent Participant was created to provide for active participation and full consultation with the Arctic indigenous peoples within the Council. They six Permanent Participants include: |
| − | * [http://www.greenpeace.org/ Greenpeace]
| + | # Aleut International Association |
| − | [https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/ The Arctic Institute]
| + | # Arctic Athabaskan Council |
| − | * [https://www.worldwildlife.org/about World Wildlife Fund] (WWF)
| + | # Gwich?in Council International |
| − | * [https://earthjustice.org/ Earthjustice]
| + | # Inuit Circumpolar Council |
| − | * [https://eia-international.org/ Environmental Investigation Agency]
| + | # Donovian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North |
| − | * [https://www.nrdc.org/ National Resource Defense Council]
| + | |
| − | * [http://www.seas-at-risk.org/ Seas at Risk]
| + | The Arctic Council may designate member-approved organizations or states that have Arctic commercial or scientific interests as observers. Observers lack voting rights, but may take part in select projects or task forces. Since 2011, one of the preconditions of observer status is the observer must recognize the sovereignty and jurisdiction of each of the Arctic nations (Council Members). |
| − | * [http://www.hfofreearctic.org/ Clean Arctic Alliance]
| |
| − | Each country in the Arctic has its own governmental policies concerning the region. Although Arctic policy priorities differ, every Arctic nation is concerned about sovereignty and defense, resource development, shipping routes, and environmental protection.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Arctic Coast Guard Forum (ACGF)''' ==
| |
| − | ACGF is an independent, informal, operationally-driven organization, not bound by treaty, to foster safe, secure, and environmentally responsible maritime activity in the Arctic. The member States are the same as the Arctic Council. ACGF Chair duties will rotate every two years in concert with the Arctic Council Chair. ACGF is an important platform of dialogue, consultation, communication and cooperation for member countries. It organizes exercises to facilitate safe and secure maritime activity in the Arctic. Arctic Guardian 2017 was the first operative exercise held in Iceland, September 2017.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Arctic search and rescue (SAR) is the main capability ACGF is enhancing. Member countries recognize the need to develop information sharing and situational awareness between coast guards, emergency authorities, and other stakeholders involved in SAR operations. Identified challenges are:
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Long distances
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Challenging weather
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Ice and cold conditions
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Poor communications network
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Lack of infrastructure
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Scarce resources
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Capacity to host patients
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Shared situational awareness
| |
| − | | |
| − | · Unsuitable rescue and survival equipment
| |
| − | | |
| − | = '''Countries''' =
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Donovia''' ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | The main goals of Donovia in its Arctic policy are to utilize its natural resources, protect its ecosystems, use the seas as a transportation system in Donovia's interests, and ensure that it remains a zone of peace and cooperation. Donovia currently maintains a military presence in the Arctic and has plans to improve it, as well as strengthen the Border Guard/Coast Guard presence there (see Military Variable). Using the Arctic for economic gain has been done by Donovia for centuries for shipping and fishing. Donovia has plans to exploit the large offshore resource deposits in the Arctic. The Northern Sea Route (NSR) is of particular importance to the country for transportation, and the Donovian Security Council is considering projects for its development. The Security Council also stated a need for increasing investment in Arctic infrastructure. Donovia conducts extensive research in the Arctic region, notably the manned drifting ice stations and the Arktika 2007 expedition, which was the first to reach the seabed at the North Pole. The research is partly aimed to back up Donovia's territorial claims, in particular those related to its extended continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Donovia likely will sustain diplomatic approach toward Arctic development to encourage multi-country cooperation regarding initiatives such as continental shelf claims and exploitation, and nautical logistical infrastructure. Despite ongoing tensions in other regions, Donovia maintains multilateral cooperation within the Arctic Council and other institutions regarding Arctic development. Multilateral cooperation facilities Arctic development projects and allows Donovia to maintain dialogue about its military buildup in the area. Continued diplomacy in the Arctic is essential to Donovia as it concedes that it cannot develop such a vast and challenging environment on its own.
| |
| − | | |
| − | In 2014, Donovia published a strategy paper for the development of the Arctic region and national security through 2028. This paper identifies six major development priorities for the Arctic region:
| |
| − | | |
| − | # Integrated socio-economic development of the Arctic zone of Donovia | |
| − | # Development of science and technology | |
| − | # Modernized information and telecommunication infrastructure | |
| − | # Environmental security | |
| − | # International cooperation in the Arctic
| |
| − | # Provision of military security, protection, and protection of the state border of Donovia in the Arctic
| |
| − | | |
| − | Donovia’s 2015 National Security Strategy supports the Arctic strategy and emphasizes the importance of international cooperation concerning Arctic issues. Public policy experts believe that Donovia has benefited from its cooperative stance by positioning itself to address collective transnational issues, such as oil spills, and enabling economic investments and collaboration.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Donovia has continued to work with other Arctic states both bilaterally and via the Arctic Council on non-military matters such as search and rescue efforts, economic efforts, scientific research, safety, and environmental exercises. During an Arctic development meeting in March 2017, the President of Donovia stated that Donovia is open to partnerships with other countries on mutually beneficial projects such as natural resource development and global transport corridors. This statement has been followed by actions such as multiple cooperation agreements being signed with South Torbia for infrastructure and gas exploration in the Yamal Peninsula and eastern Donovia. South Torbia sees itself as the Pacific gateway to the Northern Sea Route and this cooperation is viewed as being very positive. South Torbia published an Arctic master plan last year, providing that country’s strategic direction for engagement in the region.
| |
| − | | |
| − | While Donovia’s track record of cooperation in the Arctic has been positive, this may not be true in the future. This is especially true given the forecasted changes for the region in the coming decades. These changes could herald the beginning of a period of greater tension. These transformations include maritime access, resources, continental shelf claims, and Donovian reaction to increased NATO presence.
| |
| | | | |
| | + | The Arctic Council Chairmanship rotates between member states every two years. Donovia currently chairs the council until 2023. |
| | {| class="wikitable" | | {| class="wikitable" |
| − | |+'''Trends Likely to Redefine Cooperation with Donovia''' | + | |+Arctic Council Chair |
| − | !Variables
| + | |'''Years''' |
| − | !Factor
| + | |'''Chair Country''' |
| − | !Potential Scenarios
| |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Physical Environment / Climate | + | |'''1996-1998''' |
| − | |Arctic Sea ice reduction | + | |Canada |
| − | |Increased access to the Northern Sea Route
| |
| − | prompting concerns from Donovia
| |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Economic | + | |'''1998-2000''' |
| − | |increase global interest in exploiting Arctic resources and the technological ability to do so | + | |United States |
| − | |Increase international competition to exploit and market Arctic resources
| |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Legal | + | |'''2000-2002''' |
| − | |CLCS decision on continental shelf claims | + | |Otso |
| − | |*Donovia's claim being denied by UNCLOS
| |
| − | <nowiki>*</nowiki>Donovia using succfessful claim to overreach
| |
| | |- | | |- |
| − | |Political / Military | + | |'''2002-2004''' |
| − | |Donovia perceives an immediate threat from NATO in the Arctic | + | |Framland |
| − | |Donovia responds with aggressive moves | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2004-2006''' |
| | + | |Donovia |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2006-2009''' |
| | + | |Bothnia |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2009-2011''' |
| | + | |Arnland |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2011-2013''' |
| | + | |Torrike |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2013-2015''' |
| | + | |Canada |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2015-2017''' |
| | + | |United States |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2017-2019''' |
| | + | |Otso |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2019-2021''' |
| | + | |Framland |
| | + | |- |
| | + | |'''2021-2023''' |
| | + | |Donovia |
| | |} | | |} |
| | | | |
| − | == '''United States''' == | + | === Barents Euro-Arctic Council === |
| − | | + | The Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) is the forum for intergovernmental cooperation on issues concerning the Barents Region. The BEAC meets at the Foreign Ministers level in the chair country at the end of term of office. The chair rotates every second year, between Framland, Bothnia, Donovia and Torrike. |
| − | The United States is not a signatory to UNCLOS.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [https://www.state.gov/e/oes/ocns/opa/arc/ U.S. Arctic policy] is based on the following principal objectives:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * National security
| |
| − | * Protecting the Arctic environment and conserving its living resources
| |
| − | * Ensuring environmentally-sustainable natural resource management and economic development in the region
| |
| − | * Strengthening institutions for cooperation among the Arctic nations
| |
| − | * Including the Arctic’s indigenous communities in decisions that affect them
| |
| − | * Enhancing scientific monitoring and research on local, regional, and global environmental issues
| |
| − | | |
| − | On January 9, 2009, President Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive (NSPD)-66 on Arctic Region Policy. NSPD-66 is currently the active Arctic policy playbook being pursued by the U.S.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The U.S. Arctic Policy Group is a federal interagency working group comprising those agencies with programs and/or involvement in research and monitoring, land and natural resources management, environmental protection, human health, transportation and policy making in the Arctic. The APG is chaired by the U.S. Department of State and meets monthly to develop and implement U.S. programs and policies in the Arctic, including those relevant to the activities of the Arctic Council.
| |
| − | | |
| − | State Department’s [https://www.state.gov/e/oes/ocns/opa/index.htm Office of Ocean and Polar Affairs] (OPA) is a part of the State Department’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. OPA is responsible for formulating and implementing U.S. policy on international issues concerning the oceans, the Arctic, and Antarctica.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Canada''' ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Canada has more Arctic land mass than any country. On 23 August 2010, Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper said protection of Canada's sovereignty over its northern regions was its number one and "non-negotiable priority" in Arctic policy. Canada's [http://www.northernstrategy.gc.ca/index-eng.asp Northern Strategy] priorities are:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Exercise Arctic sovereignty
| |
| − | * Protect environmental heritage
| |
| − | * Promote social and economic development
| |
| − | * Improve and devolve northern governance
| |
| − | | |
| − | Canada’s strategy has both domestic and international dimensions. It is considered a “people first” strategy and was co-developed by the government and indigenous groups in the North. The provinces of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut are negotiating directing with Olvana for investment in infrastructure.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Denmark/Greenland/Faroe Islands''' == | |
| − | | |
| − | The Kingdom of Denmark is an Arctic nation with the importance of the Unity of the Realm with Denmark in Europe and the self-governing countries Greenland in the Arctic and the Faroe Islands in the North Atlantic. Since Denmark is a member state of the European Union (EU), the Arctic policy of EU affected the development of the [http://um.dk/en/~/media/UM/English-site/Documents/Politics-and-diplomacy/Greenland-and-The-Faroe-Islands/Arctic strategy.pdf Kingdom of Denmark Strategy for the Arctic, 2011-2020]. | |
| − | | |
| − | The key elements of Denmark’s Arctic strategy are:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Development that benefits the inhabitants of the by incorporating a fundamental respect for the Arctic peoples’ rights to utilize and develop their own resources as well as respect for the indigenous Arctic culture, traditions and lifestyles and the promotion of their rights
| |
| − | * An overall goal of preventing conflicts and avoiding the militarization of the Arctic
| |
| − | * A peaceful, secure, and safer Arctic
| |
| − | * Self-sustaining growth and development
| |
| − | * Development with respect for the Arctic’s vulnerable climate, environment and nature
| |
| − | * Close cooperation with our international partners
| |
| − | Denmark and Greenland have an EEZ while an EEZ has not yet been declared in the Faroese fisheries territory. The Kingdom has submitted documentation to the CLCS for claims relating to two areas near the Faroe Islands and by 2014 plans to submit documentation on three areas near Greenland, including an area north of Greenland which, among others, covers the North Pole. The actual work of the project is a collaboration between Jarðfeingi (Faroe Directorate of Geology and Energy), the Danish Maritime Safety Administration, DTU Space (Institute for Space Research and Technology), National Survey and Cadastre and the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS). Jarðfeingi, together with GEUS, is project manager for the Faroese Continental Shelf Project (half funded by the Faroe Islands) while GEUS is the project manager for the Greenland part where the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum in Nuuk and the Arctic Science IntegrAtion Quest (ASIAQ) (Greenland’s Survey) take part.[[File:Greenland and Faroe Islands CLCS Claims.png|center|thumb|'''Greenland and Faroe Island CLCS Claims''']]
| |
| − | | |
| − | Denmark’s priority for defense policy is to maintain the Arctic as an area of low tension and international cooperation. It sees the Baltic Sea as an area of higher threats and priorities than the Arctic.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Norway''' ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | [https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/fad46f0404e14b2a9b551ca7359c1000/arctic-strategy.pdf Norway’s Arctic Strategy] has five major priorities:
| |
| − | | |
| − | # International cooperation. The Arctic Council is the only circumpolar forum for political discussions at government level, and is attracting increasing attention outside the Arctic. 30 projects under EU cross-border programs involved participants from northern Norway.
| |
| − | # Business development. 24.5 billion Norwegian krone (NOK) was the value of fish exports from northern Norway in 2016. This amounts to around 60% of the region’s total exports of goods.
| |
| − | # Knowledge development. 16% of the companies in northern Norway face recruitment difficulties compared with 9% nationwide. 705 million NOK was spent on research relating to the Arctic through the Research Council of Norway ion 2016.
| |
| − | # Infrastructure. 40 billion NOK was allocated to investment projects in Norway’s three northernmost counties.
| |
| − | # Environmental protection and emergency preparedness. 1,831 high-risk vessels passed through Norwegian waters in 2016, according to the Vardø Vessel Traffic Service. These vessels are over 130 meters in length, vessels carrying dangerous or polluting cargo, including radioactive material, and vessels towing or pushing a tow where the combined length exceeds 200 meters. Of these, nearly 400 were oil tankers.
| |
| − | Norway’s Arctic policy (Nordkloden) is interlinked with the government’s regional policy and includes input and development for the Sámi people.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The Svalbard archipelago is a group of islands around halfway between Norway and the North Pole. Although part of the Kingdom of Norway, the exercise of sovereignty over the islands is subject to the terms of the 1920 Svalbard Treaty. The treaty extends rights of equal access and commercial exploitation to all of the 46 contracting parties. The treaty also specifically prohibits the establishment of a naval base or any fortifications or structures used for ‘warlike purposes’. A series of events over the past few years has sustained a level of tension on the islands. In 2015 Norway demanded an explanation when the Donovian Deputy Prime Minister flew into Svalbard, in defiance of a travel ban on a journey to the North Pole. In April 2016 Donovian special purpose forces instructors landed in Svalbard before holding a parachute exercise over the polar ice cap. It was reported as part of a major exercise that a simulated amphibious assault masked by extensive electronic warfare capabilities was conducted by Donovia against Svalbard. Around the same time the Donovian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov launched a new attack on a number Norway’s policies on Svalbard and linked the Norwegian position to the wider issue of the militarization and the stronger role of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in the Arctic.
| |
| − | | |
| − | As the “northern flank” of NATO, Norway takes a dual approach when dealing with Donovia. It continues bilateral cooperation while at the same time maintaining a policy of strong defense. Although Norway does not consider Donovia to be a direct threat, it has observed what it sees as the ‘new normal’ in the Arctic. In its annual assessment of current security threats the Norwegian Intelligence Service has said that growing Donovian presence in the Arctic has been an important part of its modernization program and it expects this presence to grow.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''Torrike''' ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | Having missed out on the oil boom for geographic reasons, Torrike has sought to gain access to other potential areas of interest and is deeply interested in gaining access to the Arctic. When Norway declared independence in 1905, the Empire had initially tried to retain northern Norway as this gave it an opening to the Norwegian Sea and an ice free outlet to the wider world. Skolkan was unable to sustain this claim, but it has not been forgotten. The idea was resurrected in the mid‐90s, with an offer to buy, or lease, a slice of northern Norway. The bid was rebuffed, but Torrike still maintains the ambition. Torrike may consider radical plans to guarantee access.
| |
| − | | |
| − | == '''United Kingdom''' ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | The United Kingdom (UK) only recently has stated its policy concerning the Arctic, and for the first time specifically included a military component of that policy. It has identified the Arctic and the High North as an area of concern, largely due to the increasing Donovian military expansion. Currently the Antarctic has a higher priority than the Arctic, and the UK has chosen to not appoint an Arctic Ambassador to improve co-ordination of policy in Whitehall and bolster UK representation in Arctic affairs. The House of Commons Defense Committee recently called on Ministers of Parliament to improve the UK’s Arctic capabilities. These recommendations include the following:
| |
| | | | |
| − | * Outline the under-ice capabilities of Royal Navy (RN) submarines and set out a policy for future exercises beneath the polar ice cap
| + | === The Arctic Five === |
| − | * Explain the concept of operations for Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers deployed to the North Atlantic and High North
| + | The Arctic Five is an ad hoc association of the Arctic Ocean littoral states of Denmark (Greenland), Canada, Donovia, Norway, and the United States. It addresses emerging disputes in the region. International disputes in the Arctic are associated with economic rights and maritime territory. Framland and Donovia are asserting expanded rights to the Arctic based upon surveys of the continental shelf. Donovia has claimed law enforcement authority over international waters in the Northern Sea Route (NSR), despite protests from other countries. |
| − | * Assess the role of the Albion-class amphibious assault ships in operations to defend NATO’s northern flank before deciding whether or not to keep them in service
| |
| − | * Ensure UK military aircraft have the range and resilience to sustain operations in the Arctic, and have been tested thoroughly in such environments
| |
| − | * Justify the decision to acquire only nine P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft for the Royal Air Force
| |
| − | * Reinstate the Royal Marines’ extreme cold weather training in northern Norway to ‘normal’ levels in 2019 The committee members noted the recent Donovian submarine activity in the North Atlantic surpassed the Warsaw Pact era activity, especially in the Greenland-Iceland-UK (GIUK) Gap. This activity coincides with the UK’s reduced anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities.
| |
| | | | |
| − | == '''People’s Republic of Olvana (PRO)''' == | + | === The Arctic Security Forces Roundtable === |
| | + | (see '''Security Issues''' below) |
| | | | |
| − | The [[Olvana|PRO]] has a growing interest in the Arctic region. It was granted observer status in the Arctic council in May 2013 and considers itself a near-Arctic nation. The PRO has declared its general preference for pursuing its economic agenda on a bilateral basis instead of through regional organizations such as the Arctic Council. PROs policy on the status of territorial waters and freedom of navigation in the western Pacific Ocean might be received poorly by the Arctic countries if it began to be implemented in the Arctic Ocean. Some have speculated concerning the potential linkage between Olvanan interest in the Arctic and its increasing international presence as a naval power. The Olvana People’s Navy (OPN) has successfully sent a small naval flotilla into the Bering Sea between Donovia and Alaska. The OPN made its first visits to Denmark, Bothnia, and Torrike around the same time. Having possessed a single icebreaker since the early 1990s, a second, larger nuclear-powered icebreaker is under construction. A recent report has suggested that the OPN may be considering future submarine operations in the Arctic. Olvanan cargo ships are sailing along the Northeast Passage as part of their self-declared “Polar Silk Road”. Olvana and South Torbia have been in a series of talks and negotiations on how to partner in Arctic development.
| + | === Additional Governance === |
| | + | Western European Arctic states have multi-layered international partnerships and alliances. Bothnia and Torrike are members of the European Union (EU). Framland and Otso are not EU members but participate in the EU?s border-free Schengen Area. Framland, Bothnia, Otso, Framland, and Torrike also participate in the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers, which are for integration and cooperation between the Nordic states. |
| | | | |
| − | Olvana released in January 2018 its first formal Arctic policy which was focused primarily on shipping, resource development, and marine research. It pointedly took no position on the legal status of either the Northern Sea Route or the Northwest Passage concerning EEZs being based on mileage or continental shelf claims. The policy also reinforced the PROs support of UNCLOS and willingness to work within the laws of the respective Arctic nations.
| + | == Security Issues == |
| | + | '''The Arctic Security Forces Roundtable''' is a multinational forum to improve communications and maritime domain awareness. Canada, Framland, Bothnia, Arnland, Framland, Donovia, Torrike, and the U.S. are members. The Council temporarily disinvited founding member Donovia because of Donvia?s aggressive military posture in Europe. |
| | | | |
| − | == '''Iceland''' ==
| + | Security within the DATE Arctic Region focuses on two topics: military security of individual states and the common security of multiple regional states. |
| | | | |
| − | Iceland’s policy on Arctic issues is anchored in a parliamentary resolution adopted unanimously by Althingi in the spring of 2011 which outlines 12 priority areas. They cover: “Iceland’s position in the region, the importance of the Arctic Council and the UNCLOS, climate change, sustainable use of natural resources and security and commercial interests. Emphasis is furthermore placed on neighbor-state collaboration with the Faroe Islands and Greenland as well as the rights of indigenous peoples.
| + | Military security mostly consists of jurisdiction and border related issues, while common security deals with threats of piracy, terrorism and environmental disasters in the region. Jurisdiction and border related issues take three major forms in the Arctic: those that are relating to continental shelves, those that focus on internal waterways that tend to be multilateral in nature, and those that are unsettled bilateral boundaries. |
| | | | |
| − | Iceland has no standing military forces. There is a U.S. naval presence at Keflavik, and NATO provides Icelandic air policing. Iceland’s [http://ams.hi.is/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Small-State-Briefs-4_Bailes-and-Olafsson.pdf Arctic Affairs Policy] is being debated due to concern over Donovian aggressiveness in the region, political differences concerning pro- and anti-NATO positions, and divisions over the EU.
| + | Arctic countries retain military presences in the Arctic to project their influence in the region and to protect their national security. However, a national military presence cannot solve issues that warrant international cooperation. Capabilities to provide shipping protection, to mitigate environmental disasters such as oil-spills, to deal with threats such as terrorism and smuggling are essential for common safety. These challenges necessitate cooperation among the Arctic states. |
| | | | |
| − | == '''Bothnia''' == | + | == Legitimacy and Effectiveness == |
| | + | The international system has been sufficient to address disputes and grievances thus far, and Arctic stakeholders remain committed to working through established diplomatic channels and international law. |
| | | | |
| − | Despite being a member of the Arctic Council, Bothnia has no written policy concerning the Arctic.
| + | == International Laws and Agreements == |
| | + | Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states have the right to create an exclusive economic zone (EEZ). In this zone, the coastal state has exclusive right to explore and exploit natural resources of the sea as well as the seabed and its subsoil, and any other economic exploitation. The coastal state may also exercise environmental jurisdiction in the zone. The EEZ can extend to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (approximately 370 km). |
| | | | |
| − | == '''Otso''' ==
| + | Under Article 76 of UNCLOS, a coastal state has the possibility of extending its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles if within 10 years of the Convention coming into force for the state concerned, it can document to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) established pursuant to the Convention, that several scientific criteria are met. The coastal state will then have the right to living and non-living resources on and under the seabed beyond 200 nautical miles, subject to an obligation to make payments or contributions to the International Seabed Authority pursuant to Convention Article 82. |
| | | | |
| − | Despite being a member of the Arctic Council, Otso has no written policy concerning the Arctic.
| + | Search and Rescue within the Arctic is governed by the Arctic Council through a circumpolar treaty signed by all members, with geographic responsibility for SAR operations divided among the various member states. |
| | | | |
| − | = '''Legal Considerations''' = | + | === Current Disputes and Issues of Concern === |
| | | | |
| − | Again, the Arctic is a region, not a country, with few international binding laws and treaties unlike the Antarctic Treaty System for the South Pole. It is in effect, a “soft law” region governed by the Arctic Council agreements. These include the Search and Rescue Agreement, the Arctic Science Agreement, the Arctic Fisheries Agreement, and the Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response Agreement. Also the Polar Shipping Code is expected to be published by the IMO in the future.
| + | ===== Northern Passages ===== |
| | + | The Northeast (NE) Passage, also known as the Northern Shipping Route (NSR) in Europe, is more navigable with less ice than the Northwest (NW) Passage, but Donovia imposes a tariff for its use. In contrast, Canada imposes no tariff on the NW. The NE Passage passes through Donovian territorial waters. Donovia maintains the passage with an icebreaker fleet, but also patrols it for security. The proximity to strategic Donovian military naval assets makes the NE Passage a risk for U.S. and European freedom of movement. |
| | | | |
| − | Transiting this region by ship, and mining and drilling activities bring up legal considerations:
| + | ===== Arctic Nuclear Weapons Free Zone ===== |
| | + | While the Arctic Council does not address issues of security, several member-states are urging the council to adopt security measures to ensure that the Arctic is free of nuclear weapons. |
| | | | |
| − | # There are currently no legal agreements to address liability for offshore accidents by either oil rigs or commercial ships.
| + | ===== Territorial Disputes ===== |
| − | # Regulatory authority of coastal states are limited concerning international shipping.
| + | The principal international disputes are associated with territorial and maritime boundaries, continental shelves, and the economic rights associated with these claims. These include disputes between the U.S. and Canada, Canada and Framland, Canada and Donovia, and Framland and Donovia (though Donovia and Framland signed a maritime boundary agreement in 2010). As of 2020, all parties were working cooperatively or through international legal channels for resolution. |
| − | # Limits on liability in the International Maritime Organization instruments is insufficient given potential costs of cleanup (hazardous materials handling, response costs, etc).
| |
| − | # There are no reciprocal development standards for remote oil and gas sites.
| |
| − | # There are no regional standards for foreign investment. Each Arctic country is very different in how they regulate.
| |
| − | Canada has declared Northwest Passage through the Canadian Arctic archipelago to be internal waters. They publicly state they have the authority to regulate this route and no one can pass through their waters without their permission. This position is in contravention of UNCLOS and contradicts the position of the United States and the European Union. | |
| | | | |
| − | Similarly, Donovia is writing regulations for the Northern Sea Route. This includes a regulation stating only Donovian-flagged vessels can transit that route, in contravention of UNCLOS. Donovia’s position on UNCLOS, to which it is a signatory, is that it does not provide operational regulation, but mainly framework-type general regulation that leaves a lot of room for Donovia to interpret and implement it the way they want.
| + | Potential territorial disputes in the Arctic involve overlapping extended continental shelf claims. Donovia, Framland, and Canada have all stated intent to extend their continental shelves northward under the guideline provided by UNCLOS, and their submitted claims overlap. In 2001, Donovia submitted a proposal claiming the Lomonsov Ridge was part of Donovia?s Continental Shelf. The territory claimed by Donovia in the submission is a large portion of the Arctic reaching the North Pole. In 2015, Donovia resubmitted a revised claim including years of additional data. Its claim now covers over 1,199,164.5 square kilometers (463,000 square miles) of sea shelf in the Arctic. |
| | | | |
| − | An attempt to emplace Arctic governance came in 2008 with the [http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Ilulissat_Declaration.pdf Ilulissat Declaration]. Signed by all the Arctic coastal countries, this declaration recognized the major climate-related changes facing the Arctic Ocean, the potential impacts on vulnerable ecosystems and peoples, and the states’ stewardship responsibility to protect the region’s unique ecology. The parties further proclaimed that they were ‘in a unique position to address these possibilities and challenges’ given their ‘sovereign rights and jurisdiction in large areas of the Arctic Ocean.
| + | Besides maritime boundary issues, the Kingdom of Framland and , which lies directly atop the territorial boundaries of both nations within the Kennedy Channel of the Nares Strait. |
| | | | |
| − | <references />
| + | Olvana disputes Arctic nations? exclusivity to the region and has asserted itself as a ?near-Arctic state? in an attempt to legitimize future claims. |
| | [[Category:DATE]] | | [[Category:DATE]] |
Overview
The maritime and territorial claims and exclusive economic zones of the ARctic nations.
The Arctic region consists of the exclusive economic zones or territories of the United States (U.S.), Canada, Framland (including Greenland and the Faroe Islands), Torrike, Bothnia, Arnland, Otso, and Donovia. The Arctic Council defines non-Arctic nations as nations asserting interests in the Arctic, but otherwise not geographically inside the region.
Eight countries ? Canada, Norway, Denmark, Bothnia, Otso, Donovia, Torrike, and the United States ? have Arctic territory, while five countries (Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Norway, Donovia, and the U.S.), known as the Arctic Five, have Arctic Ocean coastline. Of note, Donovia has the most expansive Arctic territory of any of these countries.
The Arctic?s physical environment shapes the economic, social, and political environments. The region crosses numerous international jurisdictions, exclusive economic zones, national and international indigenous territories, and global commons. There is no single political body responsible for the entire region, although there are multiple permanent and ad hoc intergovernmental associations. Most of these organizations focus on science, environmental management, and safety. International organizations concerning the Arctic region include the United Nations (UN) International Maritime Organization (IMO), the Arctic Economic Council, the Arctic Council, the International Whaling Commission, and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC)
Some non-Arctic countries also maintain a presence for scientific and environmental research as well as to support their Arctic partners. Additionally, the global competition between great powers manifests in the Arctic, with the primary U.S. competitor being Donovia. The People?s Republic of Olvana (PRO) requested recognition as an "Arctic Country" by the Arctic Council. The Council instead granted Olvana observer status in May 2013. Olvana considers itself a ?near-Arctic? nation.
There are territorial disputes among various Arctic nations; these are stable at present but could be associated with increasing tension in the future. The most active intergovernmental associations in the Arctic are the Arctic Council, the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, and the Arctic Five. Participation in these organizations is determined by the presence of national boundaries in the Arctic region.
Governance
The Arctic Council
The Arctic Council consists of the eight countries with Arctic territory and is the principal intergovernmental forum focused on conservation, safety, and development. By mandate, it is not a forum for security issues or territorial disputes. Member nations alternate chairing the Council.
The Arctic Council is the only circumpolar forum for political discussions at the government level. It was established in 1996 as a high-level forum to promote cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic states and their indigenous peoples. In addition to Working Groups, the Arctic Council has two primary task forces: the Task Force on Arctic Marine Cooperation (TFAMC) and the Task Force on Improved Connectivity in the Arctic (TFICA). The Arctic Council is active only in the political and economic variables of the Arctic. It does not include security policy or the military.
Arctic Council
| Member States
|
Observer States
|
| United States (1996)
|
Germany (1998)
|
| Canada (1996)
|
Netherlands (1998)
|
| Donovia (1996)
|
Poland (1998)
|
| Framland (1996)
|
United Kingdom (1998)
|
| Torrike (1996)
|
France (2000)
|
| Otso (1996)
|
Spain (2006)
|
| Bothnia (1996)
|
Olvana (2013)
|
| Arnland (1996)
|
South Torbia (2013)
|
| Gabal (2013)
|
| Himaldesh (2013)
|
| Italy (2013)
|
| Japan (2013)
|
| South Korea (2013)
|
| Singapore (2013)
|
| Switzerland (2017)
|
Six Arctic indigenous peoples? associations are permanent participants. The category of Permanent Participant was created to provide for active participation and full consultation with the Arctic indigenous peoples within the Council. They six Permanent Participants include:
- Aleut International Association
- Arctic Athabaskan Council
- Gwich?in Council International
- Inuit Circumpolar Council
- Donovian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North
The Arctic Council may designate member-approved organizations or states that have Arctic commercial or scientific interests as observers. Observers lack voting rights, but may take part in select projects or task forces. Since 2011, one of the preconditions of observer status is the observer must recognize the sovereignty and jurisdiction of each of the Arctic nations (Council Members).
The Arctic Council Chairmanship rotates between member states every two years. Donovia currently chairs the council until 2023.
Arctic Council Chair
| Years
|
Chair Country
|
| 1996-1998
|
Canada
|
| 1998-2000
|
United States
|
| 2000-2002
|
Otso
|
| 2002-2004
|
Framland
|
| 2004-2006
|
Donovia
|
| 2006-2009
|
Bothnia
|
| 2009-2011
|
Arnland
|
| 2011-2013
|
Torrike
|
| 2013-2015
|
Canada
|
| 2015-2017
|
United States
|
| 2017-2019
|
Otso
|
| 2019-2021
|
Framland
|
| 2021-2023
|
Donovia
|
Barents Euro-Arctic Council
The Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) is the forum for intergovernmental cooperation on issues concerning the Barents Region. The BEAC meets at the Foreign Ministers level in the chair country at the end of term of office. The chair rotates every second year, between Framland, Bothnia, Donovia and Torrike.
The Arctic Five
The Arctic Security Forces Roundtable
(see Security Issues below)
Additional Governance
Western European Arctic states have multi-layered international partnerships and alliances. Bothnia and Torrike are members of the European Union (EU). Framland and Otso are not EU members but participate in the EU?s border-free Schengen Area. Framland, Bothnia, Otso, Framland, and Torrike also participate in the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers, which are for integration and cooperation between the Nordic states.
Security Issues
The Arctic Security Forces Roundtable is a multinational forum to improve communications and maritime domain awareness. Canada, Framland, Bothnia, Arnland, Framland, Donovia, Torrike, and the U.S. are members. The Council temporarily disinvited founding member Donovia because of Donvia?s aggressive military posture in Europe.
Security within the DATE Arctic Region focuses on two topics: military security of individual states and the common security of multiple regional states.
Military security mostly consists of jurisdiction and border related issues, while common security deals with threats of piracy, terrorism and environmental disasters in the region. Jurisdiction and border related issues take three major forms in the Arctic: those that are relating to continental shelves, those that focus on internal waterways that tend to be multilateral in nature, and those that are unsettled bilateral boundaries.
Arctic countries retain military presences in the Arctic to project their influence in the region and to protect their national security. However, a national military presence cannot solve issues that warrant international cooperation. Capabilities to provide shipping protection, to mitigate environmental disasters such as oil-spills, to deal with threats such as terrorism and smuggling are essential for common safety. These challenges necessitate cooperation among the Arctic states.
Legitimacy and Effectiveness
The international system has been sufficient to address disputes and grievances thus far, and Arctic stakeholders remain committed to working through established diplomatic channels and international law.
International Laws and Agreements
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states have the right to create an exclusive economic zone (EEZ). In this zone, the coastal state has exclusive right to explore and exploit natural resources of the sea as well as the seabed and its subsoil, and any other economic exploitation. The coastal state may also exercise environmental jurisdiction in the zone. The EEZ can extend to a maximum of 200 nautical miles (approximately 370 km).
Under Article 76 of UNCLOS, a coastal state has the possibility of extending its continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles if within 10 years of the Convention coming into force for the state concerned, it can document to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) established pursuant to the Convention, that several scientific criteria are met. The coastal state will then have the right to living and non-living resources on and under the seabed beyond 200 nautical miles, subject to an obligation to make payments or contributions to the International Seabed Authority pursuant to Convention Article 82.
Search and Rescue within the Arctic is governed by the Arctic Council through a circumpolar treaty signed by all members, with geographic responsibility for SAR operations divided among the various member states.
Current Disputes and Issues of Concern
Northern Passages
The Northeast (NE) Passage, also known as the Northern Shipping Route (NSR) in Europe, is more navigable with less ice than the Northwest (NW) Passage, but Donovia imposes a tariff for its use. In contrast, Canada imposes no tariff on the NW. The NE Passage passes through Donovian territorial waters. Donovia maintains the passage with an icebreaker fleet, but also patrols it for security. The proximity to strategic Donovian military naval assets makes the NE Passage a risk for U.S. and European freedom of movement.
Arctic Nuclear Weapons Free Zone
While the Arctic Council does not address issues of security, several member-states are urging the council to adopt security measures to ensure that the Arctic is free of nuclear weapons.
Territorial Disputes
The principal international disputes are associated with territorial and maritime boundaries, continental shelves, and the economic rights associated with these claims. These include disputes between the U.S. and Canada, Canada and Framland, Canada and Donovia, and Framland and Donovia (though Donovia and Framland signed a maritime boundary agreement in 2010). As of 2020, all parties were working cooperatively or through international legal channels for resolution.
Potential territorial disputes in the Arctic involve overlapping extended continental shelf claims. Donovia, Framland, and Canada have all stated intent to extend their continental shelves northward under the guideline provided by UNCLOS, and their submitted claims overlap. In 2001, Donovia submitted a proposal claiming the Lomonsov Ridge was part of Donovia?s Continental Shelf. The territory claimed by Donovia in the submission is a large portion of the Arctic reaching the North Pole. In 2015, Donovia resubmitted a revised claim including years of additional data. Its claim now covers over 1,199,164.5 square kilometers (463,000 square miles) of sea shelf in the Arctic.
Olvana disputes Arctic nations? exclusivity to the region and has asserted itself as a ?near-Arctic state? in an attempt to legitimize future claims.
