International Cooperation in Environment Protection, Preservation, and Rational Management of Biological Resources in the Arctic Ocean
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Russian International Affairs Council WORKING PAPER INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION IN ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION, PRESERVATION, AND RATIONAL MANAGEMENT OF BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN Materials of the International scientifi c symposium Moscow, September 4, 2012, RIAC № I Russian International Affairs Council Moscow 2013 Russian International Affairs Council Russian Maritime Law Association Pew Environment Group Editor-in-Chief: I.S. Ivanov, Corresponding Member, RAS, Dr. of History Authors: A.N. Vylegzhanin (Lead Author), Dr. of Law; Yu.N. Maleev, Dr. of Law; A.V. Kukushkina, Ph.D. in Law; N.I. Khludneva, Ph.D. in Law; I.M. Ashik, Ph.D. in Geography; S. Highleyman; D.K. Bekyashev, Ph.D. in Law; V.K. Zilanov; P.A. Gudev, Ph.D. in History; A.N. Nikolaev, Dr. of Law; I.P. Dudykina, Ph.D. in Law; M.O. Filippenkova; D.P. Karanov Сopy editing: I.N. Timofeev, Ph.D. in Political Science; T.A. Makhmutov, Ph.D. in Politi- cal Science; L.V. Filippova; A.G. Shamshurin Russian International Affairs Council pays special attention to the Arctic. Council is convinced that there are no problems in the Arctic that cannot be solved on the basis of cooperation, common sense and solid foundation of international law. In order to promote realization of Russian interests in the Arctic by establishing effective international interaction in this region RIAC initiated the project titled “Roadmap for International Cooperation in the Arctic”. The International scientific symposium “International Coopera- tion in Environment Protection, Preservation, and Rational Management of Biological Resources in the Arctic Ocean” was organized in the framework of this project. This Working Paper includes texts of presentations at the symposium held in Moscow on September 4, 2012. International Cooperation in Environment Protection, Preservation, and Rational Management of Biological Resources in the Arctic Ocean. Materi- als of the International scientific symposium held in Moscow on September 4, 2012: Working paper / [A.N. Vylegzhanin (Lead Author) et al.]; [I.S. Iva- nov, Editor-in-Chief]; Russian International Affairs Council. — Moscow: Spetskniga, 2013. — 80 pages. — ISBN 978-5-91891-326-0 © Authors, 2013 © Drafting, translation and design. NPMP RIAC, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................4 Yu.N. Maleev International Problems of the Russian Arctic Development .....................10 A.V. Kukushkina Sustainable Development and the Arctic Environment Protection: International Law Aspects .......................................................................20 N.I. Khludeneva Legal Protection of the Arctic Environment..............................................26 I.M. Ashik Contemporary Arctic Marine Research ...................................................30 S. Highleyman Preventing Unregulated Fisheries in the High Seas of the Central Arctic Ocean .....................................................................36 D.K. Bekyashev Cooperation of the Arctic States in Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing of Water Biological Resources .........................44 V.K. Zilanov Arctic Fisheries: New Challenges ............................................................48 P.A. Gudev New Regimes of Environment Protection Governance in the Central Arctic: Accent on the Regional Approach ..........................51 А.N. Nikolaev, I.P. Dudykina Legal Issues of Preservation and Rational Management of Marine Living Resources in the Central Arctic .....................................59 M.O. Filippenkova Bilateral Treaties of the Russian Federation on the Arctic Environment Protection ......................................................69 D.P. Karanov International Cooperation in the Arctic Environment Monitoring ..............77 Moderators of the International Symposium Concluding Remarks ...............................................................................79 4 Introduction It is well known that in the recent years, the Arctic countries highlight- ed the regional level of cooperation in the Arctic Ocean as the most ef- fective approach, first of all, for the purpose of preservation of especially vulnerable Arctic environment. Since 1996, following the establishment of the Arctic Council by eight states whose territory is crossed by the Arctic Circle, the political and legal weight of this regional mechanism in solving the Arctic environment protection problems has been steadily increasing.1 Since 2008, following the adoption of the Ilulissat Declaration and thus, reconstruction of the format of those five countries, from the “Eight Arctic States” whose coasts directly face the Arctic Ocean,2 the prospect of this “old-new” regional mechanism, i.e. the “Arctic Five” was accentuated, and not only in the sphere of the Arctic environment protection. The problem of identification of the legal status of the ice and water areas of the Arctic Ocean beyond the limits of the 200-mile exclusive eco- nomic zones of the five coastal Arctic states is not especially debatable in the contemporary international law literature, unlike a rather debatable problem of identification of the status of the seabed in this smallest and shallowest ocean, the major part of which is still covered with ice.3 The latter debatable problem was not considered at the International scientific symposium in Moscow. Its participants proceeded from the fact that now the five Arctic coastal states whose territories enclose the Arctic Ocean, have designated therein not only the sea areas that fall under their sovereignty but also the 200-mile exclusive economic zones in which they exercise, according to the cur- rent international law, their specific jurisdiction and sovereign environment management rights. That is, the “Arctic Five” have applied universal norms of the international law of the sea relating to coastal sea areas, in order to identify the legal status of ice covered and open water areas adjacent to their coasts. As to the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean high-latitude area, which is entirely surrounded by those 200-mile exclusive economic zones (of Russia, Canada, USA, Denmark, Norway), it is exactly these very states that play a determining role in its identification. Global mechanisms cre- ated by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 (hereinafter the Convention of 1982) “do not work” in the Arctic – and not only because of enormous differences between the ice-covered North areas and the warm waters of the Indian Ocean; another reason is that one of the five Arctic coastal states is not a party to the Convention of 1982 and is not bound by its provisions. The regional approach in this case yields a more 1 The Arctic Council member states are Russia, USA, Canada, Denmark (the Island of Greenland), Norway, Iceland, Sweden, Finland. 2 They are the first five of the above-mentioned Arctic Council member states. 3 See, for example: International courts: topical issues of international law. Inter-university collection of scientific works. Issue 2 (6). Ed. in charge G.V. Ignatenko, L.A. Lazutin. Ekaterinburg, 2010. P. 23–42 (in Russian). Rivista di studi politici internationali. Vol. 78. No. 3. 2011. P. 379–391. 5 fair result compared to a selective fulfillment of global prescriptions of the Convention of 1982. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation drew attention to the fact that “strengthening the regional level of management in conditions where universal mechanisms do not work serves like a safety net”.4 The participants in the Symposium proceeded also from the importance of institutionalization of the “Arctic Eight” format through adoption of the Declaration on the establishment of the Arctic Council of 1996. The role of the Arctic states operating first of all within the framework of cooperation in the Arctic Council is highly praised. The head of the Legal department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Sweden notes that only the Arctic states, “whose population lives in the Arctic and who realize their sovereignty and jurisdiction over vast areas of the region, bear special responsibility for its sustainable development and governance, which is demonstrated testified by the activities of the Arctic Council”.5 The Declaration on the establish- ment of the Arctic Council signed in 1996 by government representatives of the eight Arctic states notes, first of all, their “commitment to the well- being of the inhabitants of the Arctic”, “to sustainable development” of that region, “to the protection of the Arctic environment, including the health of Arctic ecosystems, maintenance of biodiversity in the Arctic region and conservation and sustainable use of natural resources”. The representa- tives of the governments of the eight Arctic states, desiring “to provide for regular intergovernmental consideration of and consultation on Arctic issues”, declared that “The Arctic Council is established as a high level fo- rum”. The Declaration states that one of its purposes is to provide “a means for promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic States, with the involvement of the Arctic indigenous communities and oth- er Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues, in particular issues of sus- tainable development and environment protection in the Arctic”. The list of members of the Arctic Council is conclusive: it includes Denmark, Iceland, Canada, Norway, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, Finland, and