Karen_A._Mingst,_Ivan_M._Arregu_n-Toft]_Essentia

(Amelia) #1
Intergovernmental Organ izations 231

resources (both fish and hydrocarbons) within its
exclusive economic zones. The miles of open
water north of the five Arctic states’ exclusive eco-
nomic zones are considered high seas and out-
side national jurisdiction. Where exactly those
bound aries are, especially in view of the melting
of the ice sheets, is now contentious.
The Arctic Council is not the only IGO
addressing polar issues. In 2015, the Interna-
tional Maritime Or ga ni za tion approved the Polar
Code affecting navigation in waters 30 degrees
of latitude from the North and South Poles. These
rules affect discharges of residue from ships
affecting mammal and sea life. The Nordic
nations have partnerships on sustainable devel-
opment issues relating to indigenous people in
the Nordic Council. And the nonprofit Arctic Cir-
cle established in 2013 provides a venue for busi-
ness groups and other interested parties to
discuss Arctic issues.
Neoliberal institutionalists view these devel-
opments in the Arctic as a reflection of states
choosing to cooperate in an area considered the
global commons because it is in the self- interest
of each to do so. For the Nordic states and the
United States and Canada, such cooperation is
long- standing and cooperation on other issues
facilitates cooperation on this issue. With an insti-


tution, new issues can be brought to the fore,
information flow can be improved, and poten-
tial conflicts become the subject of discussion.
Realists view recent conflicts over Arctic space
as further affirmation of national interests taking
priority over the interests of the commons. While
realists may emphasize the divergent po liti cal
interests of vari ous states, radicals might point to
the divergent economic interests— multinational
energy companies seek access to the Arctic’s
potentially recoverable and lucrative resources,
and that is their number one priority.

For CritiCal analy sis



  1. As global climate change progresses, how will it affect issues in the Arctic? Are states
    likely to face more conflict, or will cooperation increase?

  2. In your view, should the Arctic Council give more power to current observer states like
    India, China, and South Korea? Why or why not?


a. Carol J. Williams, “U.S. Takes Helm of Arctic Council, Aims to Focus on Climate Change,” Los Angeles Times,
April 24, 2015.


Meetings of the Arctic Council include both
government delegates like U.S. secretary of state John
Kerry, and representatives of indigenous peoples.
Free download pdf