< Back
Multilateral Governance in the Arctic: could it really work?
The most critical Arctic issues at hand are its undefined borders and the competing claims of ownership between nations. The primary countries claiming rights are the United States, Russia, Canada, Denmark, and Norway. These issues regarding the Arctic’s undefined borders are capable of prompting both economic and security conflicts.
The international trade market flows most efficiently when property rights are clearly defined. As the Arctic region houses about 22% of the earth’s remaining supplies of oil and gas, property rights should be defined preemptively to avoid conflict over which states own the resources extracted from the land. While oil and gas currently remain inaccessible under Arctic ice and regulations set by the Arctic Council, global warming and the resulting easier access to the area’s resources will prompt a race to these resources.
The Arctic’s undefined borders are also causing states to build up their militaries. A report released by the Russian National Security Council revealed plans to form a specialized military force responsible for protecting Russian interests in the Arctic. Canada plans to conduct high-profile military exercises and build a military base on the northern tip of Ellesmere Island. The US Navy released an updated Arctic Roadmap two months ago detailing how ice coverage will change in the Arctic and its impacts on Navy operations. Both Denmark and Russia are laying claim to the North Pole via the Lomonosov Ridge. The ice has not melted yet, but the disputes have already begun to heat up.
Rising global temperatures and melting Arctic ice are not slowing down anytime soon. The Arctic Council must deal with these border disputes before the ice melts, and the real race to the resources begins.
Applying for the position in Washington D.C.
The most critical Arctic issues at hand are its undefined borders and the competing claims of ownership between nations. The primary countries claiming rights are the United States, Russia, Canada, Denmark, and Norway. These issues regarding the Arctic’s undefined borders are capable of prompting both economic and security conflicts.
The international trade market flows most efficiently when property rights are clearly defined. As the Arctic region houses about 22% of the earth’s remaining supplies of oil and gas, property rights should be defined preemptively to avoid conflict over which states own the resources extracted from the land. While oil and gas currently remain inaccessible under Arctic ice and regulations set by the Arctic Council, global warming and the resulting easier access to the area’s resources will prompt a race to these resources.
The Arctic’s undefined borders are also causing states to build up their militaries. A report released by the Russian National Security Council revealed plans to form a specialized military force responsible for protecting Russian interests in the Arctic. Canada plans to conduct high-profile military exercises and build a military base on the northern tip of Ellesmere Island. The US Navy released an updated Arctic Roadmap two months ago detailing how ice coverage will change in the Arctic and its impacts on Navy operations. Both Denmark and Russia are laying claim to the North Pole via the Lomonosov Ridge. The ice has not melted yet, but the disputes have already begun to heat up.
Rising global temperatures and melting Arctic ice are not slowing down anytime soon. The Arctic Council must deal with these border disputes before the ice melts, and the real race to the resources begins.
Applying for the position in Washington D.C.
