By Shreya Nautiyal
The planet is blistering. The Arctic is sweating. Glaciers and icebergs in the Arctic make up about 20 percent of Earth’s supply of freshwater resources. However, most of these glaciers are retreating today.
The year 2023, found itself at the fiery crest of a climate wave, with scorching temperatures unmatched for 125,000 years. The Arctic is a canary in the coal mine. There is no doubt that the Arctic is considered as the ‘ground zero’ for climate change. It is the fastest warming region on the planet. There are dozens of instances indicating the potential of this region to start the breakdown of the world, like the recent case of Alaskan rivers turning bright orange as a result of melting permafrost which has released high levels of toxic metals into waterways. Despite having a comprehensive treaty for the polar south - The Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) since 1961, the polar north lacks a mosaic of efforts by the world community. However, the analogy of Antarctic does not fit well with Arctic. The basis of governance of the two extreme poles is completely different with Antarctic being subjected to international claims and having no native population. Nevertheless, the relative success of ATS at maintaining a demilitarised and an undisturbed ecosystem is a testament to the potential of international governance.
Towards a Unified Arctic Strategy
The Arctic Council was formed in 1996 through the ‘Ottawa Declaration’ with its eight surrounding coastal territories comprising of the states of Canada, United States of America, Iceland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia along with their autonomous territories. Yet the region is still regarded as a “No Man’s Land”. All member states of the council have comprehensive Arctic strategies since 2011 but there’s no one comprehensive Arctic treaty addressing all the issues of the Arctic.
The Arctic is warming at approximately twice the global average rate - a phenomenon known as ‘Arctic amplification’. The top of the world is no longer white, but blue due to the retreating ice. This melting ice is making way for cold currents, changing ecosystems, disrupting marine life and wildlife such as seals, walruses, polar bears and reindeers, climate patterns and even the rise in sea level. In addition, the thawing of permafrost will gradually contribute enormous quantities of greenhouse gases, for instance, carbon dioxide and methane, to the atmosphere; further accelerating global warming. The indigenous communities are at the forefront of bearing the brunt of the Arctic meltdown. Their traditional lifestyles, economies as well as culture is under threat. There are more
than forty indigenous peoples in the Arctic representing about 10 percent of the Arctic’s total population. Yet they are losing their control over the land and its resources. They are getting displaced, facing food insecurity as well as cultural disintegration. Moreover, the Arctic has become a hotbed for geopolitical issues. This region holds vast reserves of untapped natural resources including oil, gas and critical minerals. Retreating sea ice makes access to these resources easy and with this pace it will make it easier in the coming decades. Nations thus seek to secure energy resources to reduce dependence on volatile regions. Enhanced military capabilities in the region raise the risk of conflicts and necessitate robust defense strategies especially with the shifting global power dynamics in the region and an increasing interest of Beijing. Arctic security dialogue remains volatile, in a state of limbo and in danger of being sidelined by the NATO-RUSSIA relations in Europe in general, especially with the Russia-Ukraine war unfolding in its front yard.
As an Arena of Symbolic Politics
Over the recent decades, Arctic has emerged as an arena for symbolic politics where actions and rhetoric serve to convey the messages of identity, power and legitimacy. Post 2014, Arctic transitioned from becoming a ‘priority to a responsibility’ on account of the Russian annexation of Crimea, falling oil prices which diverted interests again towards the conventional players and more importantly the rising climate consciousness among the global citizenry. Its symbolic value lies in serving as an environmental icon often seen at the frontline of climate change, symbolising the broader environmental challenges facing the planet. As a consequence of melting ice, the Arctic serves a vast expanse of untapped resources and paves way for new maritime routes especially for Russia. Moreover, the presence of indigenous communities in the region underscores a rich cultural heritage showcasing human resilience and adaptation. The region boasts of an extensive military networks with annual military exercises, such as Operation Nanook of Canada. Even outlying states like China designates itself as a ‘near-Arctic State’ and its investment in Arctic cold climate infrastructure and a growing interest and stake in Arctic affairs projects China’s strategic interest in the region. However, these symbolic actions in recent years are giving way to geopolitical tensions by emphasising territorial claims, as well as national interests, leading to military buildup and territorial disputes.
Guiding Principles for Arctic Governance
The lack of binding agreements lead to inconsistent implementation of policies. Multiple stakeholders with divergent interests create a fragmented policy landscape, hindering cohesive action. A comprehensive Arctic treaty should be guided by principles encompassing diverse subjects including environmental conservation, building economic resilience and maintaining geopolitical stability in the region.
First, the Treaty must prioritise a ‘Just Transition’ from a neo-colonial and extractive system based on the exploitation of the most vulnerable to a reciprocal and respectful relationship with the land and an adherence to the human rights including the rights against climate change fostering sustainable livelihoods and a life of dignity for the indigenous population. For example Canadian government’s partnership with the Inuit communities on the governance of the Arctic region.
Second, International cooperation is essential to manage shared resources and address global challenges. For example the Nordic Council has its own Arctic program and its pivot to Arctic in recent years especially Norway’s High North policy ‘Nordomradepolitikken’ could be fundamental in addressing the Arctic issues through a comprehensive treaty.
Third, addressing ‘climate emergency’ in the Arctic which requires urgent and concerted action and global and regional levels which kicks in a sense of urgency to restore the Arctic ecosystem and cooperation on Arctic governance and climate resilience.
Fourth, upholding the principles of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, to address the territorial disputes and govern maritime boundaries. This can be particularly helpful in arbitration processes as seen in the settlement of the maritime dispute between Norway and Russia in the Barents Sea.
Lastly, the treaty must ensure to address the concrete issues which individual state policies, otherwise, would tend to overlook, like oil spills and ‘search and rescue’ initiatives in the region. These challenges would cater to keeping the Arctic Relevance alive in the coming times.
As of now, the major stakeholders of the Arctic region need to look at the bigger picture of formulating a comprehensive Arctic treaty, otherwise fragmented arctic policies would never lead to demilitarisation and a common governance for the Arctic region. Additionally, closer Nordic cooperation on the Arctic can be a major boost for it to be a leading Arctic player and having a greater influence on the region.
This Article is an Original Contribution to the SIS Blog.
Shreya Nautiyal is a student of M.A. IRAS (2022-24). Her core areas of interest includes Europe and Eurasia, Arctic and the Indo-Pacific with themes encompassing Security, Society and Transnational Terrorism.