Territorial Disputes in the Arctic Topic Background

1 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Table of Contents

Directors’ Welcome 3 Introduction to the Dais 4 Director - Adam Fudala 4 Director - Vanessa Lock 4 Assistant Director - Aryan Singh 5 Introduction to the Committee 6 Territorial Disputes in the Arctic 7 Topic Background 7 Introduction 7 Definition of Key Terms 8 Discussion 11 Territorial Claims 11 Exploitation of Natural Resources 12 Shipping Routes 13 Strategic and Military Considerations 14 Indigenous People 16 Current and Future Governance 17 Bloc Positions 18 Points a Resolution Should Address 19 Further Reading 20 Bibliography 21

2 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Directors’ Welcome Dear Delegates, Welcome to LIMUN 2021, the first-ever online session of LIMUN! We are incredibly honoured to be your chairs in this new virtual reality of Model United Nations debating. Undeniably, this conference is going to be a learning experience for us all. At first, it will not be easy to apply the Rules of Procedure in an online environment or to participate in different caucuses actively or even translate our mannerisms and body language using just the most basic hardware we all have. But alas, Model United Nations and LIMUN especially, have always been about innovating and imaging a reality where everything comes along - where cultural rifts can be bridged, years-long animosities are reconciled, and collective good is carefully considered together with individual needs. Bearing this in mind, overcoming the seemingly virtual space issue is not exactly a leap of faith but merely a change of perspective. As chairs, we will do our absolute best to ensure that this adjustment process is as smooth as possible. Our topic, likewise, invites us to carefully consider yet another reality seemingly foreign to the majority of us - the Arctic, one of the most legally, economically, and politically complex regions of our contemporary world. The resolution you reach in the committee should ensure the sustainable use of the resources found in the area and prevent an international fiasco with relation to territorial and military disputes. While addressing these concerns, do remember that the Arctic issues deserve both short- and long- term solutions. Having said that - make sure your brain does not freeze while researching, keep your cool during the debates, and remember that we are here to help! Sincerely, The SPECPOL Directors

Adam, Vanessa and Aryan [email protected]

3 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Introduction to the Dais

Director - Adam Fudala My name is Adam, and I am a third-year International Relations and History student at SOAS. Currently, I am trying to finish my degree while stuck in Middle-of-Nowhere, Poland, pretending this bizarre situation has its own charm. At university, with my happy-go-lucky attitude, I managed to get involved in a plethora of different extracurricular experiences. Apart from being the President of the UN Society, I also interned at the Polish Embassy in London; helped to coordinate European Parliament elections of 2019; taught English in Guangdong, China; mentored under Baroness Warsi during the Parliamentors program; and most recently helped to organize the LIMUN: HS conference, taking the role of USG-Applications. Chairing SPECPOL with Vanessa is not only a natural prolongation of the LIMUN experience but also genuinely a dream come true! Although most of my MUN friends are retiring this year, I am eager to stay in the circuit for some time more. After all, there is nothing more I want but to introduce even more people to MUN debating. Director - Vanessa Lock My name is Vanessa Lock, and I am a third-year International Public and Social Policy student at the London School of Economics. Due to the pandemics, I am currently at home in Hong Kong. Over the three years in university, I have been lucky enough to be involved in a wide range of activities, from being a core member of TeamLSE in Year 1 to organising a service trip to Lianzhou (a rural area of mainland China), organising an inter-university volunteering programme, and going on an exchange trip to Russia. I really enjoy organising events that could make a difference in people's life. This is also why I decided to become part of the LIMUN:HS Secretariat this year! I have been doing MUN for over three and a half years now, and LIMUN 2021 will probably be my last MUN conference. I really look forward to working with Adam on the same team again, and I hope Adam, Aryan, and I could give you fellow delegates another amazing conference experience!

4 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Assistant Director - Aryan Singh My name is Aryan Singh, from India, and I am currently a second-year undergraduate at the Jss Academy of Technical Education Noida pursuing Bachelors in Technology in Information Technology. I'm a seasoned Model UN fanatic who's been working on Model UN circuits for the past five years, with decent national and international conference experience. I often work with a range of well-known organisations such as the Geneva International Model UN, International MUN (UNESCO, UNDP, Australian Embassy Acknowledged), Gent Model UN, and several others. It is an honour to serve this Committee with the capacity of an Assistant Director and with that I firmly believe that the current agenda is dynamic in nature. I hope that the Delegates will maintain proper decorum and respect for the Chairs and the Committee during the conference, and that we will see some captivating debates. Looking forward to meeting all of you!

5 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Introduction to the Committee1 The Special Political and Decolonisation Committee (SPECPOL) is the fourth committee of the UN General Assembly (GA), and is also known as C4. Compared to other General Assembly committees, such as DISEC or SOCHUM, SPECPOL’s mandate is somewhat less focused. Its original mandate was to help manage trusteeship nations, mediate in issues, and help decolonization efforts, with the aim of having all colonized territories established with majority rule. In 1994, when the last trusteeship, Palau, became de jure and de facto independent, the trusteeship system which had dominated C4 was dismantled, leaving the committee with a sparse agenda. As such, the UN GA decided to merge an unofficial 7th UNGA committee, the Special Political Committee, with C4, to create modern-day SPECPOL. The committee’s unusual history helps to explain its mandate’s fragmented nature; the UN summarises the committee’s agenda as concerning itself with “a broad range of issues covering a cluster of five decolonization- related agenda items, the effects of atomic radiation, questions relating to information, a comprehensive review of the question of peacekeeping operations as well as a review of special political missions, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the Report of the Special Committee on Israeli Practices and International cooperation in the peaceful uses of outer space. In addition to these annual items, the Committee also considers the items on Assistance in mine action, and University for peace biennially and triennially respectively.” As the committee’s full name suggests, its discussion points shift from atomic radiation issues, to peacekeeping issues, all the way to being responsible for UNRWA. In this way, it is no understatement to say that this committee’s mandate is wider than most. All of the resolutions SPECPOL produces are non-binding. As a committee that produces non-binding resolutions, this also means that any peacekeeping operations or punitive measures cannot be authorised solely by SPECPOL and as such cannot be included in resolutions. Instead, SPECPOL has the power to suggest that the UN Security Council investigate the issue and carry out the actions recommended by SPECPOL.

1 Switzerland at the UN, “The GA Handbook: A practical guide to the United Nations General Assembly.”

6 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Territorial Disputes in the Arctic

Topic Background

Introduction Territorial disputes in the Arctic date back more than a century. Its unique geographical location paired with its economic value make these disputes ongoing and unresolved until today. Since the end of the Cold War in 1990, new approaches have been taken to resolve the issues between the neighbouring states. Recent developments, however, have brought new tensions to the issue. The ground beneath the ice cover of the Arctic is known to hold significant natural resources.2 Those resources are estimated to include as much as a third of the world’s natural gas reserves.3 Due to ongoing global warming, the extent of Arctic ice is shrinking,4 making the potential exploitation of those resources more and more feasible.5 In addition to that, new shipping routes between Atlantic become navigable with an enormous potential to shorten international shipping routes by as much as 40%.6 Alongside these economic opportunities becoming more and more viable, the tension between Arctic countries rises again. The continuous disarmament of the Arctic is endangered, and Russia has been observed to significantly increase its military presence in the area. The Arctic Ocean, mostly covered by an enormous ice shield, lies between Russia, Canada, the U.S.A. (Alaska), Denmark (Greenland), and Norway. Territorial disputes arise for various reasons. The continental shelf reaches much further into the Arctic Ocean than it does at many other shores, making the usually applied 200 nautical miles-zone obsolete. The North Pole as a strategic important point is claimed by several of the neighbouring countries, and Russia has recently deployed a Russian flag to the ground of the Arctic Ocean beneath the North Pole. This geographic situation is, however, not new. Territorial disputes date back to early explorations of the Arctic. With increasing international economic

2 The Economist, “The Arctic - Not so cool.” 3 Ibid. 4 IPCC, “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.” 5 Wallace, “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle.” 6 Brown, “As Arctic Ice Melts, Territorial Disputes Are Hotting Up.”

7 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

activity these disputes became more and more serious in the late 19th century. After the two World Wars, the Arctic became majorly involved in Cold War activities and political effort was focused on keeping the area free of nuclear warheads and testing sites.7 Although the Russian Navy sank more than a dozen outdated nuclear powered submarines in the Arctic Ocean, this goal was achieved to the greatest possible extent. With the end of the Cold War the focus of political discussion went back to economic exploration and remained fairly un-political until tensions between the USA and Russia in Eastern Europe and the Middle East over the past few years.8 Given the above territorial claims, and the new realities in the Arctic as a result of climate change, a clear need for a new system of governance for the Arctic emerges. It is therefore essential for SPECPOL delegates, beyond engaging in discussion on the aforementioned territorial disputes, to consider the ways in which Arctic governance can be improved in order to provide a robust and long-lasting solution, that will ultimately start to iron out the uncertainties regarding this region. In addition to this Study Guide it is highly recommended that delegates have a detailed look at the resources provided in the Further Reading section. Definition of Key Terms In the following section we will define some key terms of importance for the discussion :

The Arctic/the Arctic Ocean: Describes the area surrounded by Russia, Canada, the U.S.A., Denmark and Norway. Most of the landmass in the Arctic Ocean is clearly assigned to one of the neighbouring countries.

The United Nations Convention of the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS): Is the main convention governing the dispute in the Arctic.9 It is ratified by all neighbouring countries, except the U.S.A. The convention defines Territorial Waters, the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and provides guidelines of how to incorporate the geographical specification of the shore such as the extension of the continental shelf (cf. Article 76).

7 Koivurova, “The Arctic Conflict - Truth, Fantasy or a Little Bit of Both?” 8 Ibid. 9 Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, “Law of the Sea: A Policy Primer,” p.59-66.

8 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Territorial Waters: Waters in a 12-mile band from the coastline in which country can apply laws and regulation as on their mainland.10

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ): Waters in a 200-mile band from the coastline in which a country holds the exclusive rights for exploitation of natural resources. Countries cannot, however, enforce laws and regulations in this area outside their territorial waters.11

Continental Shelf: Waters in which are geographically part of the mainland (and not the ocean), which can be claimed by the neighbouring country for exploitation of natural resources.12

International Waters: Waters outside Territorial Waters.13

Figure 1: Definition of off-shore water bands. Diagram by the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.14

Arctic sector: Area defined by straight border lines from the land border to the North Pole. Basically, like sharing a cake on the basis of how much of the outer border of it you possess.

Northwest Passage (N.P.): Seaway from the North Atlantic to the North Pacific through the Arctic Ocean avoiding the Panama channel and as such

10 Ibid, p.11-18. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 Ibid, p.11.

9 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

the shortest seaway between Europe/the North American East Coast and the North American West Coast and Asia. Until very recently the opportunities to navigate through the N.P. were very limited. However, with ongoing global warming, the periods in which it is navigable become longer and the economic activity increases rapidly.15 The equivalent route along the North Coast of Russia is known as the Northern Sea Route.

Global Warming/Climate Change: Global Warming had a significant impact on the ice cover of the Arctic. Nearly every summer in recent years a new record low of ice coverage in the Arctic is observed, reaching its second lowest level ever in September 2020.16 This opens new shipping routes, making natural resources previously beneath the ice shield exploitable. At the same time this development decreases the area of highly reflective white icy surfaces increasing the warming of the area. It is international consensus that this development is mainly caused – or at least accelerated – by ever-increasing carbon dioxide emission around the globe.17

Nuclear Non-Proliferation: Although the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons does not define the Arctic as a Nuclear-weapon-free zone (NWFZ), nuclear weapons have never been positioned in the Arctic.18 There have been proposals into formally designating the Arctic as a NWFZ, but discussions have not taken place at a high level.19 Still, militarily motivated nuclear activity has, however, taken place. This was mainly through the usage of nuclear submarines. Russia has stored the wreckage of several nuclear submarines in their Arctic territorial waters.20

Natural Resources: Recent studies suggest that the Arctic holds about an eighth of the world’s oil reserves and about a quarter of the world’s gas reserves.21 However, with the recent energy independence of the United States, ever-dropping international oil prices, and the global drive towards renewables, the appetite of global powers to operate in this extreme

15 Wallace, “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle.” 16 Amos, “Arctic Sea-Ice Shrinks to near Record Low Extent.” 17 IPCC, “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.” 18 Buckley, “An Arctic Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone: Circumpolar Non-Nuclear Weapons States Must Originate Negotiations.” 19 Ibid. 20 Konyshev and Sergunin, “Russia’s Policies on the Territorial Disputes in the Arctic.” 21 The Economist, “The Arctic - Not so cool.”

10 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

environment is doubtful.22 This of course could render the Arctic’s mineral wealth somewhat irrelevant.

Discussion

Territorial Claims

Figure 2: Current territorial claims in the Arctic. Source: The Economist and others.23

With the ratification of UNCLOS, each signatory state had the opportunity to hand in their claim of continental shelf outside their EEZ.24 This needed to be done within a time frame of ten years after the respective country’s ratification of the convention. All Arctic neighbouring countries except the USA, have ratified the convention and have submitted their claims.25 The USA is not allowed to submit their claims under the umbrella of UNCLOS as they haven’t ratified the convention so far. They have, however, submitted an informal claim not contradicting any other official claims of the other neighbouring countries.26

22 Henriques, “The Rush to Claim an Undersea Mountain Range.” 23 Ibid. 24 Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, “Law of the Sea: A Policy Primer,” p.11-18. 25 Ibid, p.59-66. 26 Wallace, “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle.”

11 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

In terms of official claims, however, Denmark was the last one due to submit their claim earlier in 2015, following its ratification of the convention in 2005.27 The claim contradicted both the Russian and Canadian claims which were handed in earlier and extends widely outside Denmark’s Arctic sector.28 The claim is based on the assumption that the so-called Lomonosov Ridge, an area of shallow waters in the Arctic, is part of the continental shelf of Greenland. If this is the case, that would strongly support Denmark’s claim. This is however highly controversial as the Lomonosov Ridge connects Greenland’s continental shelf with Russia’s continental shelf.29 Denmark claims to define this extension of its continental shelf in accordance to Article 76 of UNCLOS. In addition to that, the strategically important North Pole would fall into the area defined by the Lomonosov Ridge as well. Hence the current understanding, is that whoever is able to prove the ridge is part of their continental shelf will own the North Pole.30 A geological race has begun. Exploitation of Natural Resources The Arctic is known to hold about a third of conventional natural gas and oil reserves, which makes the area very attractive for exploitation. Especially areas with fairly shallow waters would allow a cheap exploitation of those natural resources comparable with the once in the Gulf of Mexico or the North Sea. Many of them are, however, at least at the moment, covered by the Arctic ice shield during most of the year. That makes exploitation economically non-viable. But the recent shrinking of the Arctic ice shield has shown that such exploitation might become possible in the future.

The potential for exploitation is also impacted by the development of the wider economic environment. At the moment, the international oil price is so low that even future exploitation would not make sense, even more so considering the extreme operational environment of the Arctic. In addition to that, renewable energies, shelf gas and coal are alternative energy resources which are by far cheaper to exploit and in addition to that available much closer to the location where needed. Although potentially beneficial in the long-term, the exploitation of natural resources is as such not of utmost importance for the discussions today.

27 Henriques, “The Rush to Claim an Undersea Mountain Range.” 28 Wallace, “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle.” 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid.

12 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

That being said, the Arctic is presumed to hold about an eighth of the world’s gas resources and some 25% of the world’s gas resources.31 As the specific location of the resources is unknown, there is a lot of national and international research currently ongoing in order to further estimate the feasibility of the exploitation of the national resources in the Arctic. A question that does need to be answered in the 2021 climate, is whether this exploration will advance with the general tendency towards renewables. With the US Biden administration not so keen on fossil fuels, could there be a chance for other states to make bolder claims? Shipping Routes There are two shipping routes in the Arctic that could significantly shorten international trade connections when navigable. Both of these shipping routes have gained additional attention recently as they become navigable for longer periods of time during the northern hemisphere’s summer. This is mainly due to Climate Change and the ever-decreasing low of the expansion of the Arctic ice shield.

The first is the so-called Northwest Passage off the northern coast of Canada leading through Canadian and U.S. territorial waters. For a long time, Canada has claimed the islands along the route and with it the territorial waters around them to be Canadian territory.32 As a result, large parts of the Northwest Route are inside those territorial waters and do hence require Canadian permission to be used. American ice breakers have, however, used the route without formally asking for permission by Canada as early as in the 1960s.33

With the introduction of the rules of UNCLOS the route was automatically seen as Canadian territorial waters making it a requirement by international law to ask Canada for permission before sailing along the route. This supports Canada’s earlier claims. The question remains whether this agreement will hold when the navigation of the route becomes more and more economically viable. That will also depend heavily on the rules that the Canadian government will put forward for using the passage.34

31 The Economist, “The Arctic - Not so cool.” 32 Wallace, “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle.” 33 Rothwell, “The Canadian-U.S. Northwest Passage Dispute: A Reassessment.” 34 Ibid.

13 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

The Northern route along the north coast of Russia is less debated for various reasons. Firstly, it is the longer route from the Atlantic to the Pacific being only of economic advantage for a few northern European ports.35

Figure 3: Exploration of Shipping Routes in the Arctic. Source: Brigham and Ellis.36

Secondly, it is further north than the Northwest Passage meaning that the navigation conditions are worse due to longer ice coverage. Thirdly, it lies solely within Russian territorial waters making Russia incontrovertibly in charge of managing the passage. The passage does, however, offer an alternative route to the Northwest Passage offering comparable economic advantages and navigation disadvantages. It remains unclear whether there will be competition between the routes and the countries managing them as soon as they become navigable in a significant manner. Strategic and Military Considerations The Arctic is of high strategic and military importance to its neighbouring countries. Military activity in the area dates back to the Cold War when the

35 Brown, “As Arctic Ice Melts, Territorial Disputes Are Hotting Up.” 36 Brigham and Ellis, Arctic Marine Transport Workshop.

14 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Iron Curtain between the western hemisphere and the Soviet Union crossed the Arctic twice, once in Europe and once between Alaska and the Soviet Union. If the conflict had reached nuclear proportions, wide areas of the Arctic would have been destroyed. Hence, nuclear non-proliferation treaties were established in order to keep the Arctic free of nuclear armament.

Figure 4: Ongoing militarisation of the Arctic. Source: Business Insider and others.37

Following the end of the cold war a broad disarmament from both Russia and the U.S.A. was observed in the area. Recent tensions, especially in Ukraine, have, however, induced growing military activity in the Arctic. Russia has invested especially heavily in its military bases in the Arctic. Other neighbouring countries have been fairly reluctant to follow Russia’s example. This, as well as the fact that Russia holds claim over the biggest Arctic sector, leads to a significant military disbalance in the Arctic.

At the moment, the military presence of Russia in the area is not seen as a direct threat to peace, security and stability in the area. However, with growing tensions around territorial claims and two competing shipping

37 Nudelman and Bender, “This map shows Russia's dominant militarization of the Arctic.”

15 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

routes that are very likely to become more and more economically viable over the next few years this military presence might prove to be a substantial advantage in the area.

Another player to consider is China (PRC). In 2018 China revealed plans for a ‘Polar Silk Road’, as an expansion of the 2016 Belt and Road Initiative.38 The plans include a 5 year programme to create shipping routes to Europe via the Arctic passages.39 China classifies itself as a ‘near-Arctic state’, and therefore an important stakeholder in Arctic affairs.40 Given China’s strong involvement in other territorial disputes such as in the South-China Sea, the entry of yet another strong player into the arctic game has the potential to be alarming for member states with Arctic territories and claims. China has furthermore announced plans to launch an imaging satellite in 2022, which will monitor Arctic shipping routes, and be able to monitor Arctic sea ice conditions in real time.41 States that are interested in using the arctic passage as a transport route may have concerns over Chinese satellite imaging of their exports. Indigenous People One issue that is perhaps overlooked on too many occasions, is the fact that the Arctic region has its own inhabitants. Increasingly, members of the international community are coming to recognise that the role that ‘traditional knowledge’ (that is, centuries-old good practice employed by indigenous people), has to play in the battle against climate change.42 With the Arctic region being the single most affected region in the world by climate change,43 countries like Canada,44 Denmark, or even Russia,45 seem increasingly keen to engage with their indigenous communities, and enhance their standing as promoters of sound environmental governance in the region. Going forward, any solution to the governance of the Arctic circle, must address claims for rights and jurisdiction over the region by

38 Cai, “Understanding China’s Belt and Road Initiative.” 39 Reuters, “China pledges to build ‘Polar Silk Road’ over 2021-2025.” 40 Wion, “China pledges to build ‘Polar Silk Road’ by 2025 to tap natural resources.” 41 Humpert, “China to monitor satellite to monitor arctic shipping routes.” 42 Raygorodetsky, “Why Traditional Knowledge Holds the Key to Climate Change - United Nations University.” 43 Amos, “Arctic Sea-Ice Shrinks to near Record Low Extent.” 44 Canada, “Canada’s Arctic Foreign Policy.” 45 Peterson McDaniel, “Russia’s Arctic Strategy.”

16 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

indigenous communities like the Inuits.46 This is especially important for our debate, given the SPECPOL mandate. Current and Future Governance The Arctic is currently broadly governed by the Arctic Council, which was established in 1996, with the eight Arctic nations (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and United States) having full membership.47 The Arctic Council has widely been lauded as a “model for regional governance,” with its success in keeping the Arctic free from conflict, its designation of Indigenous Peoples representatives as Permanent Participants and the establishment of a series of Task Forces cited as major successes.48

However, the Arctic Council is not without its weaknesses. Many say that the Arctic Council has inherent structural weaknesses, mainly to do with funding, the unclear status of observer states, an apparent lack of accountability and a lack of integration of northern regional governments in decision making.49 Most crucially however, the Arctic Council lacks a mandate to deal with issues of Arctic peace and security, as the Ottawa Declaration, which established the Council, deliberately stops short of mentioning these vital issues.50

Many have advocated for the creation of an Arctic Treaty to mirror the highly successful Antarctic Treaty.51 However, establishment of such a treaty would be a highly complicated task, and certainly, simply replicating the Antarctic Treaty would not be a functioning arrangement. There are elements of the Antarctic Treaty, such as the suspension of jurisdictional claims under Article 4, that could help with the current situation in the Arctic.52 However, there have been fears that a treaty, being a high-level multilateral agreement between nation states, would decimate opportunities for participation for indigenous people, at a time when these communities are seeking to make their demands for jurisdictional rights heard.53

46 Henriques, “The Rush to Claim an Undersea Mountain Range.” 47 Exner-Pirot et al., “Form and Function: The Future of the Arctic Council.” 48 Ibid. 49 Ibid. 50 Parker, “Looking North: How Should the Arctic Be Governed?” 51 Ibid. 52 Ibid. 53 Ibid.

17 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Bloc Positions The neighbouring countries take positions that are equivalent with their recent efforts to ensure their position in the Arctic. Depending on the country their argumentation is either economically, politically, militarily or territorially based and might well include a combination of those arguments. It is hence important to address all these issues in the discussion.

Russia has come a long way in how it sees the Arctic since the days of the Soviet Union, when Mikhail Gorbachev spoke of an “Arctic Zone of Peace” in 1987.54 Currently, Russia is expanding both its military presence and icebreaker vessel capabilities in the Arctic region. As the country with the most outstanding territorial disputes,55 Russia is only likely to be open to a comprehensive Arctic solution once it sees signs of a favourable settlement to its territorial claims.

Many, especially western countries such as EU countries, see the growing military strength of Russia in the area with concern. However, the developments have not been dramatic enough to encourage western countries or alliances to become proactive in the area. However, countries who have been observing military developments involving Russia in recent years with great concern (e.g. Ukraine or the Baltic states), want to ensure that clear regulations for military engagement are proposed.

Countries with export-oriented economies are mainly interested in new shipping routes that might become usable. They are likely to call for a fair and ideally internationally managed usage of Arctic shipping routes. These countries include China, Japan, South Korea and EU countries.

Oil exporting countries, mainly in the Middle East, but also other nations depending on the oil market such as Russia and the USA, are worried about the impacts that a mass-exploitation of Arctic oil and gas resources might have on the world market.

Countries engaged in the conflict in the South China Sea observe the developments around the geological definition of territorial waters very closely as they might impact on the territorial claims there. If a new definition of continental shelf is discussed they will see that as precedence for the conflict in the South China sea and want to make their voice heard.

54 Parker, “Looking North: The Re-Emergence of the Arctic as a Geopolitical Hotspot.” 55 Konyshev and Sergunin, “Russia’s Policies on the Territorial Disputes in the Arctic.”

18 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

These countries include China and its allies in the conflict, as well as Japan and its own allies, plus other smaller states in the region.

SPECPOL member states are likely to form their position depending on their own interests but also with respects to the interests of their region and their political, economic and military allies.

Points a Resolution Should Address

The committee should aim to find a new comprehensive framework addressing all the various dimensions of the disputes in the Arctic. This should happen to ensure that the disputes do not evolve to a threat to international peace and security in the upcoming years.

You should keep in mind that the political and geographical situation in the Arctic is unique and that recent developments and agreements need to be implemented and related to any new proposal that is brought forward. All the dimensions of the conflict have a certain potential to develop to or endorse peace-threatening situations in the region. The Security Council should hence ensure that its proposal addresses all the issues that arise in the Arctic. Finally, opinions from non-Arctic countries should be sought so as to ensure that an internationally accepted agreement on the future of the Arctic can be found.

To do so, the resolution should address this non-exhaustive list of questions:

● How can recent territorial and economic issues around the Northwest Passage be resolved peacefully? ● What can be done to prevent an increasing military presence in the Arctic and to maintain the neutral status of the region? ● How can the natural resources in the Arctic be efficiently and sustainably managed and exploited in order to benefit the whole international community? Which state actors or international organisations should be in charge of managing such resources? How can impacts to the global economy be compensated and utilised to the advantage of the international community? ● Is there a necessity to negotiate a new international Arctic treaty and if so, what should its role change and what improvements can be made over international regulations? How could such a treaty help to resolve territorial disputes?

19 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

● Should there be a move towards a greater role for the Arctic Council in matters pertaining to Arctic peace and security?

Further Reading ● United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. We suggest that you look at the original text of the Convention Provisions concerning territorial seas, as well as Article 234, are especially relevant. ○ https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/u nclos/unclos_e.pdf ● Potential for conflict in the Arctic: The New Cold War? - An excellent compilation of infographics by Spencer Cook that offers a compact guide to the issues associated with our topic. ○ https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/a19b6a79bc5c4596b52531 856af389c9 ● Arctic Assets - An incredibly comprehensive compilation of maps and charts by the National Geographic Magazine showing the current state of play in the Arctic ○ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/graphics/map -shows-eight-nations-projecting-power-over-arctic-assets- feature ● The Antarctic Treaty Explained - This brief explainer by the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) offers a clear discussion of the merits of the Antarctic Treaty. We recommend that delegates thinking about the potential of an Arctic Treaty refer to this piece as a source of inspiration. ○ https://www.bas.ac.uk/about/antarctica/the-antarctic- treaty/the-antarctic-treaty-explained/

20 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

Bibliography Amos, Jonathan. “Arctic Sea-Ice Shrinks to near Record Low Extent.” BBC News, September 21, 2020, sec. Science & Environment. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54211760. Brigham, Lawson and Ellis, Ben. “Arctic Marine Transport Workshop.” Circumpolar Infrastructure Task Force, Secretariat at the Institute of the North, United States Arctic Research Commission, International Arctic Science Committee. (2004). https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/A/192006645.pdf Borgerson, Scott G. “Arctic Meltdown: The Economic and Security Implications of Global Warming.” 87 Foreign Aff. 63. (2008) https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/fora8 7&div=26&id=&page= Brown, Jessica. “As Arctic Ice Melts, Territorial Disputes Are Hotting Up.” The Independent, March 1, 2018. https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/geopolitical- consequences-of-melting-arctic-ice-russia-canada-us-northern-sea- route-shipping-natural-resources-a8229306.html. Buckley, J Adele. “An Arctic Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone: Circumpolar Non-Nuclear Weapons States Must Originate Negotiations.” Mich. St. Int’l L. Rev. 22 (2013): 167. Cai, Peter. “Understanding China’s Belt and Road Initiative” Lowy Institute, 22 March 2017. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/understanding-belt-and- road-initiative. Canada, Global Affairs. “Canada’s Arctic Foreign Policy.” GAC, April 12, 2017. https://www.international.gc.ca/world- monde/international_relations-relations_internationales/arctic- arctique/arctic_policy-canada-politique_arctique.aspx?lang=eng#a4. “China pledges to build ‘Polar Silk Road’ over 2021-2025” March 5, 2021. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-parliament-polar- idUSKBN2AX09F Exner-Pirot, Heather, Jennifer Spence, Annika E. Nilsson, Heather Nicol, Natalia Loukacheva, and Maria Ackrén. “Form and Function: The Future of the Arctic Council.” The Arctic Institute (blog), February 5, 2019. https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/form-function-future-arctic-

21 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

council/. Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. “Law of the Sea: A Policy Primer.” Tufts University, 2017. https://sites.tufts.edu/lawofthesea/files/2017/07/LawoftheSeaPrimer.p df Henriques, Martha. “The Rush to Claim an Undersea Mountain Range.” BBC, July 2020. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200722-the- rush-to-claim-an-undersea-mountain-range. Humpert, Malte. “China to Launch Satellite to Monitor Arctic Shipping Routes” December 8, 2020. https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/china-launch-satellite-monitor- arctic-shipping-routes IPCC. “Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, 2013. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/ Koivurova, Timo. “The Arctic Conflict - Truth, Fantasy or a Little Bit of Both?” High North News, November 2016. https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/analysis-arctic-conflict-truth- fantasy-or-little-bit-both. Konyshev, Valery, and Alexander Sergunin. “Russia’s Policies on the Territorial Disputes in the Arctic.” Journal of International Relations and Foreign Policy 2, no. 1 (2014): 55–83. Nudelman M, Bender J. “This map shows Russia's dominant militarization of the Arctic.” 2015. Business Insider UK. https://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-russias-militarization-of- arctic-2015-8. Parker, Angus. “Looking North: How Should the Arctic Be Governed?” Geographical Magazine, March 2020. https://geographical.co.uk/geopolitics/item/3615-looking-north-how- should-the-arctic-be-governed. Parker, Angus. “Looking North: The Re-Emergence of the Arctic as a Geopolitical Hotspot.” Geographical Magazine, 2020.

22 SPECPOL LIMUN 2021

http://geographical.co.uk/geopolitics/item/3605-looking-north-there-emergence-of-the-arctic-as-a-geopolitical-hotspot. Permanent Mission of Switzerland to the United Nations. “The GA Handbook: A practical guide to the United Nations.” 2017. https://www.eda.admin.ch/dam/mission-new- york/en/documents/UN_GA__Final.pdf Peterson McDaniel, Cadra. “Russia’s Arctic Strategy: An Analysis of the Role of Diplomatic, Cooperative, and Domestic Policies.” The Arctic Institute (blog), November 2017. https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/russias-arctic-strategy-analysis- role-diplomatic-cooperative-domestic-policies/. Raygorodetsky, Gleb. “Why Traditional Knowledge Holds the Key to Climate Change - United Nations University.” United Nations University, 2011. https://unu.edu/publications/articles/why-traditional- knowledge-holds-the-key-to-climate-change.html. Rothwell, Donald R. “The Canadian-U.S. Northwest Passage Dispute: A Reassessment.” 26 Cornell Int'l L.J. 331 (1993). https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/cintl 26&div=16&id=&page= The Economist. "The Arctic - Not so cool." 2015. https://www.economist.com/international/2014/12/17/frozen-conflict. Wallace, Izabelle. “Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle: An Explainer.” The Observer. Accessed March 18, 2021. https://theobserver- qiaa.org/territorial-claims-in-the-arctic-circle-an-explainer. Wion, “China pledges to build ‘Polar Silk Road’ by 2025 to tap natural resources” March 6, 2021. https://www.wionews.com/world/china- pledges-to-build-polar-silk-road-by-2025-to-tap-natural-resources- 368390.