Climate change in the Arctic is a catastrophe waiting to happen. This 20 million square kilometre area of land and sea that stretches around the geographic North Pole is warming twice as fast as the global average. The complexity of the impacts on global climate, rising sea levels and ocean currents are still barely foreseeable. Yet not everyone views an ice-free future with concern: sea lanes are opening up in the Arctic Ocean that could change trading routes in the future. New options are arising for fishing. Improved navigability facilitates the extraction of resources such as oil, gas and minerals. US geologists estimate that roughly one quarter of global fossil fuel reserves could be located at the North Pole. The strategic importance of the Arctic is therefore increasing for many countries.
In addition, the Arctic Ocean is a research region for polar science, which is delivering important findings towards an understanding of global climate change. What do scientists need to advance their research? What framework does international law provide? And will existing freedoms continue to be upheld if there is a division of the Arctic continental shelf and an extension of the sovereignty of the coastal states? These and other questions are at the centre of the international conference on Arctic Science, International Law and Climate Change – Legal Aspects of Marine Science in the Arctic Ocean. At the invitation of the Federal Foreign Office and the Finnish Foreign Ministry numerous specialists from the worlds of politics and research are coming to Berlin on 17 and 18 March 2011 to discuss these and related questions.
The five coastal states – Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Russian Federation and the USA – fundamentally reject an international protection treaty following the model for the Antarctic. In principle, says Norway’s Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre, there is no reason to administer the Arctic Ocean any differently from the Mediterranean. Until now there have been no disputes between the coastal countries about Arctic land masses or the course of the borders there. The position is different with regard to the water column: according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, every coastal state can lay claim to all the resources within an “exclusive economic zone” of 200 nautical miles. The “high seas” begin outside this zone and are theoretically open to use by everyone. However, the Convention on the Law of the Sea allows coastal states to extend the sovereign rights of their economic zones significantly beyond the customary 200 nautical miles if they can prove there is a natural extension of their continental shelf under the waters. Coastal states must register their territorial claims with the United Nations Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and support them with geological studies. Scientists use sonar and seismic devices to investigate undersea elevations like the so-called Lomonosov Ridge. In fact, several Arctic countries base their claims on this geological formation.
At a summit meeting in Ilulissat on Greenland in May 2008 the Arctic Five stressed their willingness to engage in international cooperation and to resolve disputes by peaceful means. “In doing so, they are emphasizing something that should be seen as a matter of course,” says Professor Rüdiger Wolfrum (see interview on page 45). The German expert on international law is judge at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) in Hamburg, where he is responsible for interpreting the Convention on the Law of the Sea. Appealing to the Convention alone is not enough, because the 320 articles of the agreement that came into force in 1994 only provides a very general framework. Although the freedom of marine research is guaranteed in the Convention on the Law of the Sea when basic research is concerned, this is disregarded by many countries, says Wolfrum. “Either permits are denied or conditions are defined that make research difficult or even impossible.” It is not always easy to differentiate between basic research and applied research relating to the economic exploitation of the continental shelf.
Bilateral agreements could be one solution of the complex problems involved. A German research collaboration with the Russian Federation has made a major contribution to building mutual trust between the partners. Additionally, Germany argues in favour of better international coordination of research projects. This should also include a strong involvement of the indigenous population, whose contributions are still all too often ignored as unacademic. The most important forum for regional cooperation is the Arctic Council, which was founded in Ottawa, Canada, in 1996. The membership of this still purely consultative body includes not only the five coastal states, but also sub-Arctic Iceland and the EU member states Finland and Sweden. The Arctic Council develops guidelines in its working groups to prevent the spread of contaminants, to conserve biological diversity and improve ship safety.
As a permanent observer state, Germany supports an institutional strengthening of the Arctic Council and greater influence for non-Arctic actors. It sees good grounds for this: as a polar research nation, which has a long tradition of involvement at both poles, Germany makes a significant contribution to climate and marine research. As a sales market for Arctic raw materials, it also sees important interests affected. The country’s significant trading fleet would benefit from shorter sea routes. At the same time, Germany supports far-reaching climate goals at the international level.////
