Bilateral contacts is an ordinary regular procedure in the international practice. The US State Secretary Hillary Clinton visited Norway on June 1-2. The event was not highlighted as something special. After Oslo, the capital of the country, Mrs. Clinton went to the northern Tromsø province accompanied by Norway's Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Store. That’s the place where the Arctic issue was discussed, or, to be exact, the fight for the Arctic moving into an active phase. The talks were held behind close doors leaving a lot of things out of public knowledge, so it’s only press conferences that can give some clue.
What exactly made up the agenda? First, the thing that strikes the eye is excessive activity of the two politicians exceeding their authority while discussing the issue concerning more than just two Arctic countries.
The “internationalization” of the Arctic resources and the Northern Sea Route topped the agenda. The Americans and Norwegians made known their intent to “establish the rules” for the region. According to H. Clinton the US administration insists on the ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty that constitutes a basis for international efforts to explore the new prospects of the Arctic development. The Convention specifies the rules that defend the freedom of navigation, provide for security at sea and serve the interests of all sea faring nations protecting sea lanes vital for commerce as well as potential development of Arctic resources. It appears to sound like plain sailing but the euphonic phrase covers a big problem – the draft of the Convention never offered a universal solution to the problem of defining international and national maritime border lines neither in littoral, nor in exclusive economic zones of Arctic states. It should be perfected to be usable, something the Americans and Norwegians don’t want. With the loopholes it has at present the Convention will defend the interests of the one who is stronger.
Moreover, there is no agreement on national offshore areas division lines, so “freedom of international activity” means multiplying problems leading to dramatic consequences. For instance, the Russia’s claim to the Lomonosov Ridge evokes confusion in the West. The Russia scholars made precise that the Ridge going from the Russian shore crosses the central part of the Arctic Ocean and stretches about 1800 km from the New Siberian Islands to the island of Ellesmere of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. The width is 60-200 km. It’s a huge water area going far beyond the Russia Federation’s 200 nautical miles zone limits. In 2002 Russia went to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf with an offer to establish new borders of the Russian sea continental shelf going out of the 200-mile zone (within the limits of Russian Arctic sector). It was advancing the argument that the underwater ridges of. Mendeleev and Lomonosov constituted continuations of its continental shelf. The UN Commission neither rejected nor satisfied the bid leaving it hanging in the air.
It’s a typical example of how the enormous Arctic space makes remember the Wild West when people coming from different countries were ready to rush in making the land a property asserting the right of the strong. These are the approaches that come near to the intentions of US and Norwegian politicians.
They plan to use the Arctic Council as an international instrument to advance their ambitions.
The Arctic Council was established in 1996 upon the initiative of Finland to defend unique nature of the Polar region. It has eight members (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Island, Norway, Russia, Sweden, the USA) to tackle the issues of northern ecology and cooperation in air and sea rescue operations.
At first glance the establishment of such an organization is to be nothing but welcomed, though there is a “but”. As time goes by the Council has been moving into the direction of serving the interests of the Western members, first of all the USA. Russia has gradually been moved to the sidelines of its agenda. Like this time, for instance, the US State Secretary kind of assigned a ‘center” comprising five states: the USA, Norway, Sweden, Island and one more (obviously it’s not Russia) to become a “nucleus” for the exploration of he Arctic.
An international center is going to be built in Tromsø, that where the permanent secretariat of Arctic Council is going to be located. Moreover, the USA was called the “most important” state of the Arctic council, what automatically makes it a chief coordinator in charge of its activities. The biggest Arctic power – Russia, that controls the whole Northern Sea Route, was not even mentioned.
The plans made public sounded as they should – soft and pleasant. Not a word about real ambitions of participants, but a lot said about the protection of Arctic ecology. In particular H. Clinton said: “the United States and Norway are committed to promoting responsible management of those resources, and to do all we can to prevent and mitigate the effects of climate change. I’m highlighting a new partnership that I started called the Climate and Clean Air Coalition, and we’re very pleased that Norway is a member” She added:” So I want to thank Norway for joining the Climate and Clean Air Coalition and making an initial commitment of one and a half million dollars, and also a pledge by Norway of one million dollars specifically to target black carbon across the Arctic. I’m very grateful that we had a chance to meet with the head of Statoil and representative of new Norwegians and ExxonMobil to talk about ways that oil and gas companies are already reducing methane and black carbon emissions from their own production”. H. Clinton deftly substituted the Arctic issues with the ecological ones, though it’s not clear what relation the parties have to “responsible management (of other counties!) resources”. Talking about the black carbon program in the Arctic, is it about the oil spills only or anything else being talked about?
Here is some explanation by H. Clinton: “A lot of countries are looking at what will be the potential for exploration and extraction of natural resources, as well as new sea lanes, and are increasingly expressing an interest in the Arctic. And we want the Arctic Council to remain the premier institution that deals with Arctic questions. So one of the issues on our agenda is how we provide an opportunity for other nations very far on the Arctic to learn more about the Arctic, to be integrated into the cooperative framework that we are establishing, and in effect, to set some standards that we would like to see everyone follow.”
Mrs. Clinton is putting it gently. But her words make it obvious that the Arctic Council becomes a structure controlling the whole process of the Arctic exploration led by a narrow group of the states assigned at the meeting mentioned above. The process of Arctic exploration without Russia (or leaving it out of the “controlling nucleus”) will be like land grab because laying claims to “development” of the riches that Russia considers its own cannot be avoided.
The Russian Arctic territory is the richest in the region. According to the Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Protection it may boast up to 586 billion barrels of oil (the Saudi Arabia’s deposits are estimated to be 260 billion barrels). The Arctic is rich in coal, nickel, copper, zinc, gold, diamonds and titanium. A huge part of these riches lies in the Russian shelves.
Besides, the “grab” cannot be excluded because the Russia Federation’s real capability to defend its interests in the Arctic is significantly reduced. In case of descendants of Wild West conquerors the weakness of competitor has always been a reason to ignore its interests. The USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway have abruptly intensified their military programs in the Arctic. Some even started to talk about “Northern mini-NATO” including Great Britain, Island, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. Canada is gong to create an Arctic navy in 2012 building five Arctic capable combat ships. Denmark approved a decision to create an Arctic military command, build a military base in the north of Greenland and deploy a rapid reaction Arctic force.
The Northern Sea Route, going along he Russian shore line, is a special problem.
After the Otto Schmidt’s (1932) expedition the Northern Murmansk-Vladivostok Sea Route was constantly open, even in the times of the Great Patriotic War. Today it’s only a Murmansk-Dixon section that is used for shipping, but the world economy needs the whole Route back as it used to be. It makes expect that other countries would be interested in its restoration. Especially taking into consideration the fact that global warming produced serious ice melting in the Arctic and Antarctica, making the North Sea Route more and more usable.
