Who resolves Arctic oil disputes?
Antarctica provides a model for settling competing claims.
from the August 20, 2007 edition
Page 3 of 3
There's a further catch: the body is prohibited from ruling on territory that's claimed by more than one state. Those countries have to work it out themselves.
Michael Byers, of the University of British Columbia, says the claimants have incentives to work out a deal. "It's not in any country's interest – or that of the big multinational oil companies – to have a Wild West scenario up there," he says.
Have countries cooperated before?
Yes, and legal experts say such efforts offer a variety of models for the Arctic.
For example: France, Ireland, Spain, and Britain all have claims on the shelf offshore from the Bay of Biscay, but decided to submit their claim jointly and subdivide it later. "We did research cruises together and there was a tremendous amount of bonhomie," recalls Professor Parson. "It was practical and pragmatic all around."
Similarly, Australia and New Zealand have overlapping claims to parts of the Tasman Sea, but worked out a territorial compromise on their own before submitting their respective claims. "The common sense approach is to try to reach a mutually negotiated settlement," says Professor Rothwell. "Indeed most of the countries around the world do adopt that approach."
Rothwell also points to the Antarctic, where 46 nations put all claims on hold indefinitely under the 1959 Antarctic Treaty. "It may be that we've moved into the stage where the Arctic states might look more closely at what has been going on in the Antarctic," he says.
What if they don't?
"If you have a resource grab, you would have a very serious problem," says Christopher Joyner of Washington's Georgetown University. "There would be a serious conflict between Canada and Russia, and the US would not be far behind."
On the other hand, one side might just back down. "The US and Canada might say, well, there's enough Arctic for us and it's not worth it to try to interfere with Russia," says Professor Posner.
Byer thinks negotiations will work. "If Russia really wanted to be difficult, it wouldn't be chartering its icebreakers to other countries [such as Denmark and Canada]," he says. "Cooperation just might succeed in this instance, which is something to celebrate in today's world."
What the foreign press says
" The division of the Arctic 'is the start of a new redistribution of the world.' "
– Rossiiskaya Gazeta
"It was the first time that a Russian expedition, having reached the North Pole, made a 13,000-ft. dive and set a Russian flag on the bottom of the Arctic Ocean. Thereby they rose our country's prestige...,' [Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia in letter to State Duma vice speaker]. 'This expedition proves that Russia is rightfully called a great polar power.'"
– Interfax, Moscow
"The whole business is more like the late-19th century scramble for Africa, when the great powers carved up the continent.... But unlike in Africa, this dispute cannot be decided on the basis of first come, first served.
"There is, of course, a bitter irony underlying all this. Access to the Arctic for all these nations has improved in recent years only because of climate change.... As thrilling as this latest expedition might be, it would have been better for mankind if the Arctic had remained an inaccessible wilderness."
– The Independent, London
"One of its most dangerous effects in the Arctic will be to expose great tracts of land to the release of methane gas ... which would actually speed up global warming – perhaps uncontrollably.
"It would be far better to seek out co-operative solutions for protecting and exploiting ... resources. This could be done by extending the Law of the Sea Treaty, or by using a precedent established in Antarctica during the 1950s, when a similar competitive surge at the South Pole was wisely steered towards a framework of legal governance."
– The Irish Times, Dublin, Ireland
RSS feed
