Recasting US Arctic Policy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No. 2421 June 15, 2010 From Russian Competition to Natural Resources Access: Recasting U.S. Arctic Policy Ariel Cohen, Ph.D. Abstract: In recent years, Russia has aggressively expanded its presence in the Arctic, while the United States has largely neglected this strategic area. Given the rising Talking Points demand for oil and gas and the likelihood that Arctic sea- • In recent years, Russia has moved rapidly to lanes will become more navigable, the U.S. should move establish a comprehensive sea, ground, and resolutely to establish U.S. sovereign rights in the Arctic. air presence in the Arctic, while the United Establishing a robust U.S. presence will require, among States has largely neglected this strategic area. other steps, significantly increasing the number of U.S. • The Arctic sea-lanes are projected to become polar-capable icebreakers. The U.S. should continue coor- more navigable, permitting increased naviga- dinating efforts with Canada and its other NATO allies, tion around the northern coasts of North Amer- working with Russia when feasible and prudent. However, ica (the Northwest Passage) and Eurasia (the the U.S. should oppose Russia’s territorial claims in the Northern Sea Route) with the help of icebreakers. Arctic without becoming party to the Law of the Sea Treaty. • Even partial development of the Arctic’s mas- sive oil and gas resources would add consid- erable capacity to the energy market, driving prices down and facilitating U.S. and global During the past decade, the Arctic re-emerged as an economic growth. area of vital U.S. interest. In addition to the oil and gas • The United States should elevate the Arctic to a bonanza, two strategic maritime routes cross the higher geopolitical priority and fully implement region: the Northern Sea route along the northern the Arctic Region Policy. This will require signif- coast of Eurasia and the Northwest Passage along the icantly boosting the U.S. presence in the Arc- northern coast of Canada. tic and acquiring polar-capable icebreakers. The U.S. government predicts that Arctic sea-lanes • Congress should authorize expanded oil ex- will become more navigable, permitting increased ploration and production in promising Arctic navigation around the northern coasts of North Amer- areas to increase the national energy supply. ica and Eurasia with the help of icebreakers. This This paper, in its entirety, can be found at: would facilitate access to vast natural resources and http://report.heritage.org/bg2421 encourage competition among Arctic and even non- Produced by the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies Arctic powers. In recent years, Russia has been aggres- of the sively advancing its claims and is planning a compre- Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis hensive military and commercial presence in the area. Institute for International Studies Published by The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002–4999 (202) 546-4400 • heritage.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. No. 2421 June 15, 2010 Despite the Arctic’s strategic location and vast in the Arctic include “missile defense and early natural resources, the U.S. has largely ignored this warning”; “deployment of sea and air systems for vital region. (See Map 1.) Days before leaving office, strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime pres- President George W. Bush issued National Security ence, and maritime security operations”; ”ensuring Presidential Directive 66/Homeland Security Presi- freedom of navigation and overflight”; and “pre- dential Directive 26, which established the U.S. venting terrorist attacks.”2 As an Arctic power, the Arctic Region Policy,1 but the Obama Administra- U.S. needs to deal with national security and gover- tion has been slow to move on this issue. nance, maritime transportation, scientific research, The United States needs to elevate the Arctic to a and environmental conservation. These responsibil- higher geopolitical priority and fully commit to ities fall under various agencies and departments, implementing the Arctic Region Policy. The Arctic including the Departments of State, Defense, and Interagency Policy Committee (AIPC) should have Homeland Security. full responsibility for Arctic policy coordination, U.S. Arctic Region policy is coordinated by the although it should not allow environmental and cli- newly created Arctic Interagency Policy Committee, mate change issues to dominate the agenda. To co-chaired by the National Security Council and the advance U.S. sovereign territorial rights in the High White House Council on Environmental Quality North, the area inside the Arctic Circle, Congress (CEQ). Senior officials in charge include Rear Admiral should allocate funding to acquire additional ice- Thomas Atkin (U.S. Coast Guard), Special Assistant breakers and to increase the number of Coast Guard to the President and Senior Director for Transborder forward operating locations (FOLs) on the North Security at the National Security Council, and Slope and in western Alaska. Michael Boots, CEQ Associate Director for Land and In the international realm, the U.S. should Water Ecosystems. The committee met in February expand dialogue with members of the Arctic Coun- 2010 for the first time. It is charged with assessing cil, including Russia, on cooperating in the High the status of implementation of the Arctic directive. North through the Arctic Policy Group (APG). In July 2009, the Obama Administration stood However, the U.S. should oppose Russia’s territory up the Ocean Policy Task Force under the CEQ. The grab without joining the U.N. Convention on the task force is charged with ensuring good steward- Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of ship of the oceans, U.S. coasts, and the Great Lakes. the Sea Treaty (LOST). The U.S. should raise the In August 2009, White House officials and other Arctic as a priority on NATO’s agenda and explore federal officials traveled throughout the Arctic to an agreement with Canada on joint management of observe ongoing activities and met with industry navigation, security, and commercial exploitation of representatives and locals.3 hydrocarbons in the Northwest Passage. Finally, The Arctic Policy Group is an interagency coordi- Congress should authorize expanded oil explora- nating body managed by the U.S. State Department. tion and production in the Arctic National Wildlife Domestically, the APG works with U.S. implement- Refuge (ANWR) and other promising Arctic areas to ing agencies and formulates and presents unified increase the national energy supply. U.S. Arctic policy positions at the Arctic Council, an The U.S. Arctic Policy and U.S. Claims international body that includes the five circumpolar states—the U.S., Canada, Denmark, Norway, and The 2009 U.S. Arctic Regional Policy states that Russia—as well as Finland and Sweden. The council American national and homeland security interests is heavily weighted toward environmental issues. 1. George W. Bush, “Arctic Region Policy,” National Security Presidential Directive NSPD-66/Homeland Security Presidential Directive HSPD-25, January 9, 2009, at http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-66.htm (March 12, 2010). 2. Ibid. 3. DoDLive Bloggers Roundtable, “Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Thad Allen,” U.S. Department of Defense, August 28, 2009, at http://www.dodlive.mil/index.php/tag/ocean-policy-task-force (April 5, 2010). page 2 No. 2421 June 15, 2010 U.S. and Russian Interests in the Arctic Bering Russia’s 200-nautical- Strait mile zone from baselines United States Boundaries of Russia’s CHUKCHI claim filed in 2001 (Alaska) SEA Area of continental shelf EAST beyond 200 miles SIBERIAN SEA claimed by Russia Canada 0 m to 1,249 m 1,250 m to 2,499 m Mendeleev Ridge 2,500 m to 4,000 m Foot of Alaskan Water Depth continental slope extending into Makarov the Chukchi Sea Basin Fram Basin LAPTEV Russia Area SEA surveyed by NOAA Lomonosov Ridge North Pole Gakkel Ridge Franz Josef Novaya Land Zemlya Greenland Shtokman gas field KARA SEA Northwest Northern Passage Sea Route North Pole Svalbard Disputed area between Russia BARENTS and Norway SEA Source: Jeannette J. Lee, “New Seafloor Maps May Bolster U.S. Arctic Claims,” National Geographic News, February 12, 2008, at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ news/2008/02/080212-AP-arctic-grab.html (June 16, 2008). Map 1 • B 2421 heritage.org page 3 No. 2421 June 15, 2010 Military and security issues are not the focus of this and mapping will determine how far U.S. jurisdic- forum and arise only tangentially. tion can extend beyond the EEZ. LOST in the Arctic. The U.S. Arctic Region Pol- To date, the U.S. has conducted four mapping icy urges the Senate to approve U.S. accession to and two seismic cruises jointly with Canada as part LOST. However, the U.S. can execute its Arctic pol- of the U.S. Extended Continental Shelf Project. A icy without ratifying LOST. third joint cruise is planned for this summer.9 This At present, America is not bound by the treaty’s effort is important, especially considering the unre- procedures and strictures, but the U.S. is pursuing solved boundary in the Beaufort Sea and the dis- its claims under international law as an indepen- agreement over the status of the Northwest Passage. dent, sovereign nation, relying on President Harry S. According to Dr. James V. Gardner, Research Truman’s Presidential Proclamation No. 2667, which Professor in the Center for Coastal and Ocean declares that any hydrocarbon or other resources Mapping at the University of New Hampshire and discovered beneath the U.S. continental shelf are Emeritus Senior Geologist with the U.S. Geological the property of the United States.4 The U.S.