Cllimate change in the Arctic

Stosunki Międzynarodowe – International Relations • nr 1–2 (t.43) 2011 Agnieszka Ragin THE EFFECTS OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE IN THE ARCTIC 1. The Arctic of the 21st century and its hot realities The Arctic is probably the most desirable destination in the 21st century due to the climate change phenomenon. After the colonial conquests in Africa and South America, “gold rush” in the USA, citing after Oran R. Young, “the Age of the Arctic” has come1. Not to mention the Cold War period, when the strategic importance of this region increased considerably for well-known reasons, changing the Arctic into one of the regions of the greatest military signiicance on the Earth, historically the Arctic was mainly the location of scientists and travelers exclusive concern. During the past few years this region has started to exist in the society’s awareness and has been put on the agenda of all powerful actors on the international scene. Unlike Antarctica, the status and deinition of the Arctic are problematic, because “it is a mediterranean surrounded by land rather than a continent surrounded by water”2 and it is not populated exclusively by animals, but has permanent residents of a few sovereign states. The situation is still more complicated by the fact that there are no fully Arctic states, only states with the Arctic sub-regions. The Arctic occupies an enormous area, even three times bigger than mainland Europe, representing about 8 percent of the globe – 40 million square kilometers – with a population of 4 million people3. O. R. Young, G. Osherenko, The Age of the Arctic. Hot conlicts and cold realities, Cambridge 1989. Ibidem, p. 12. 3 Arctic Human Development Report 2004, Stefansson Arctic Institute, O. R. Young, N. Einarsson, „Introduction”, pp. 17–19. However, a few other deinitions of the Arctic exist. Very often the region is deined as the area where the average temperature of the warmest month (July) is below 10º Centigrade or as the region between the North Pole and the northern timberlines of North America and Eurasia. The narrowest deinition of this area is equal to the Arctic Circle line (66° 33’N), which is the approximate limit of the midnight sun and the polar night. 1 2 286 Agnieszka Ragin The Arctic. Source: Arctic Human Development Report 2004. Population of the Arctic. Source: AHDR 2004. The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 287 The indigenous people constitute one and a half million, that is 15 percent of the Arctic residents and 1.5 percent of the world indigenous population4. Without any doubts, the Arctic is the best (and the most fragile at the same time) witness of a rapid and severe climate change on the Earth. Here the increase of temperature is almost twice as fast as in the rest of the globe5. This is clearly visible in the ice extent in the Arctic. Since satellite monitoring began in 1979, six cases of the lowest ice coverage all occurred in the years 2004–2009, with a 40-percent decline between 2005 and 20076. As the newest data from the satellite show, July 2010 proved to be the second lowest record in terms of the Arctic sea ice extent, after the minimum record of 4.13 million square kilometers observed on September 16, 20077. National Snow and Ice Data Center (http://nsidc.org/images/arcticseaicenews/20100804_Figure3.png) 4 K.F. Hansen, N. Bankes, Human rights and indigenous peoples in the Arctic. What are the implications for the oil and gas industry?, in: A. Mikkelsen, O. Langhelle (eds.), Arctic Oil and Gas. Sustainability at risk?, London, New York 2008, p. 291. 5 According to the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment Scientiic Report; see online: http://www.acia. uaf.edu/pages/scientiic.html (access: August 12, 2010). 6 See NASA online: http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic_thinice.html (access: August 12, 2010). 7 See National Snow and Ice Data Center: http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/index.html (access: August 12, 2010). 288 Agnieszka Ragin Furthermore, in the High North a feedback mechanism strengthens the climate change effects. It occurs because snow does not absorb as much heat as dark water. The more ice melts, the more heat comes to the water that gets warmer and gives the heat to the land and the remaining ice surfaces. The process keeps repeating itself. It is expected that in a few decades ice-free summers will become the reality in the High North. At the beginning of this century climatologists claimed that an icefree Arctic Ocean in the summer can be expected by the year 2100. After several years, new models show that this could happen even as early as in 2015. Even if this forecast may be imprecise, the general trend as to the extent of the sea ice in the Arctic is undoubtedly declining8. However, as the climate change is a global threat with regional impacts of varying strengths, the effects of the climate change will be diverse in the Arctic, too. While Alaska will experience severe changes, the Northeast Atlantic is likely to be much less affected9. The High North is an arena of many competing interests and at the same time is a part of the global economy. “There is not just one Arctic, there are several”10, and the understanding of the Arctic depends on the author of the argumentation. The Arctic is described as: “imperiled home”, “transit zone”, “northern Mediterranean”, “common heritage”, “maritime domain”, “zone of conlict” or “region of co-operation.”11 Sometimes it is treated as an attractive tourist destination and recently, more than ever, as a “storehouse” of various natural goods, especially energy and ish resources. The crucial question “who owns the Arctic?” starts to demand policy responses12. 2. Implications of an ice-free Arctic In the Arctic the physical, environmental, social and economic changes caused by global heating are easy to perceive. Nevertheless, the environmental problems and perils, as well as the alarming scientiic future scenarios for the region, are only a part F. Lasserre, High North Shipping: Myths and Realities, in: S. G. Holtsmark, B. A. Smith-Windsor (eds.), Security prospects in the High North: geostrategic thaw or freeze?, NATO Defense College, Rome, May 2009, p. 180. 9 A. H. Hoel, Climate change, in: O. S. Stokke, G. Hønneland (eds.), International Cooperation and Arctic Governance. Regime effectiveness and northern region building, London, New York 2007, p. 114. 10 K. Dodds, From Frozen Desert to Maritime Domain: New Security Challenges in an Ice-Free Arctic, in: „Swords and Ploughshares. Global Security, Climate Change, and the Arctic”; The bulletin of the Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security, University of Illinois, Vol. XVII, No. 3, Fall 2009, p. 14. 11 Ibidem. 12 O. R. Young, The Arctic in Play: Governance in a Time of Rapid Change, „The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law” 2009, No. 24, p. 423. 8 The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 289 of the reasons for the growing interest of numerous states, not exclusively the Arctic ones. What makes the international public opinion and politicians most eager is the mineral wealth and the untouched reserves of hydrocarbons in the Arctic that are or soon will be revealed by the melting ice. The oil and gas extraction in the Arctic is nothing new. It has already constituted 1/7 of the world oil and gas production. The occurrence of hydrocarbons has caused large-scale developments in the Arctic region, such as: in the Alpine and Prudhoe Bay at the North Slope, Alaska; in the North West territories, Nunavut and Nunavik in Canada; at Melkøya in the Northern Norway; and in the Yamalo-Nenets and Khantyt-Mansii Autonomous Okrugs in Russia13. Between 1900 and 1950, not even 5 percent of the Arctic was affected by infrastructure. During the next 50 years it grew to 20-25 percent. The main reason of this was the petroleum development in Alaska and Russia. According to the UNEP assessment, if the current tendency continues, by 2050 only a few areas in the Arctic will have remained undisturbed and 50-80 percent of the High North, depending on growth rates, may experience a high level of anthropogenic disturbances. Moreover, for some parts of Russia and Fennoscandia this level may be achieved within 20-30 years14. The most accessible and economically viable oil and gas ields on the Earth have been already exploited. The major future locations of hydrocarbons are situated within politically unstable states or at the distant areas with vulnerable environments where the costs of exploration are very high15. As it was presented in the most comprehensive survey of the Arctic energy reserves, the U.S. Geological Survey Arctic Oil and Gas Report issued in July 2008: “The total mean undiscovered conventional oil and gas resources of the Arctic are estimated to be approximately 90 billion barrels of oil, 1,669 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and 44 billion barrels of natural gas liquids.”16 It represents about 25-30 percent of the world’s remaining undiscovered natural gas and 13 percent of the untapped world oil reserves. This is enough to satisfy global demands for several years. More than 70 percent of the undiscovered oil resources are estimated to occur in ive provinces: Arctic Alaska, Amerasia Basin, East Greenland Rift Basins, East Barents Basins, and West Greenland-East Canada. Above 70 percent of the unrevealed natural gas is supposed to be located in three provinces: the West Siberian Basin, the East Barents Basins, and Arctic Alaska17. A. Mikkelsen, O. Langhelle (eds.), Arctic Oil and Gas. Sustainability at risk?, op. cit., p. 2. O. Langhelle, B. T. Blindheim, O. Øygarden, Framing oil and gas in the Arctic from a sustainable development perspective, in: A. Mikkelsen, O. Langhelle (eds.) Arctic Oil and Gas. Sustainability at risk?, op. cit., pp. 36–37. 15 A. Mikkelsen, O. Langhelle (eds.), Arctic Oil and Gas. Sustainability at risk?, op. cit., p. 2. 16 Online: http://geology.com/usgs/arctic-oil-and-gas-report.shtml (access August 16, 2010). 17 Ibidem. 13 14 290 Agnieszka Ragin Assessed possibility of the presence of at least one undiscovered oil and/or gas ield with recoverable resources greater than 50 million barrels of oil equivalent. Color-code probability: very dark blue-100%, white – area of low petroleum potential. Source: USGS Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal. Certainly, the exploration of hydrocarbons in the Arctic is not problem-free, especially that more than 80 percent thereof lie offshore. Nowadays most of the explored oil and gas lie onshore, but the upward trend shows that in 2015 about 40% of hydrocarbons will be extracted offshore. Moreover, the rising temperature, wetter climate and higher intensity of storms will cause more threats to the offshore installations. However, even if exploring oil and gas in the Arctic is highly expensive and technically problematic, it is deinitely worth undertaking the greatest efforts in the longer perspective. The second interesting fact pertaining to the High North is opening of new possibilities for navigation there due to the rapid shrinkage of the ice c. In the summer The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 291 2007, which was the irst time in the history records, a direct shipping route from Europe to Asia across the Arctic, called the Northwest Passage, was open for ships without a need of using highly expensive ice-breaker ships. The ice disappearing in the High North will strongly enhance vessel trafic in the region and change the currently mostly regional activities in the northern seas into frequent global commercial connections. If the snow-free Arctic becomes an every-day reality, even including some obvious physical and logistic limitations, the global ship lanes will change signiicantly. Source: http://www.unep.org/geo/yearbook/yb2007/. There is an important difference between the Northwest Passage and the Northeast Passage: the Northwest Passage lies virtually exclusively in the Canadian-claimed internal waters (from Bafin Bay to the Beaufort Sea), while most parts of the Northeast Passage rest outside the Russian territorial waters, mostly skipping only the Russian straits. However, the latter lies in the Russian Exclusive Economic Zone, which, according to the Russian regulations on shipping along the Northern Sea Route (pursuant to article 234 of the UN Law of the Sea), obliges ships to respect the Russian regulations regarding inter alia mandatory piloting and icebreaker escort18. 18 F. Lasserre, High North Shipping: Myths and Realities, op. cit., p. 182. 292 Agnieszka Ragin The vision of an ice-free Arctic looks extremely attractive especially for these states whose economy relies on sea transport. The Northwest Passage shortens the distance between Europe and the Far East by 26 percent comparing to the Suez Canal route, about 4,700 sea miles via the Panama Canal, and even three times in comparison with the cruise through the Cape Horn19. The Northeast Passage cuts down the shipping distance from Yokohama to Rotterdam or London by about 40 percent in comparison with the journey through the Suez Canal. The exceptions are the transArctic connections from the Far East to the Mediterranean Sea ports, which – compared with the Suez Canal route – involve a similar or even longer distance20. However, the future scenario of shipping routes in the High North is hard to be drawn today. Even though summer will be ice-free, winter will bring ice again, making the navigation through new ice-bergs more dificult, unpredictable and dangerous. Furthermore, the fact that some parts of the passage are rather shallow may increase the costs of the shorter course so signiicantly that such transport may never be economically viable. It should not be forgotten either that isheries in this region are equal to 10 percent of the global production of ish for human consumption21. It is assessed that marine isheries in the Arctic become more productive because of the rising temperatures22. The reduction of the ice surface will mostly affect polar bears and some seal species, pushing them towards the inal extinction. The diversity and occurrence of animals and ish species will change. Some of them will move northwards giving space in the sea to newcomers. Naturally, changes in the natural environment make ish stocks migrate from one zone to another. If this means changing the territory from one country to another, new international disputes may arise on this ground quite easily. It is believed that the climate change may have positive and negative effects on the industrial infrastructure at the same time. Whereas in the North Atlantic sector, from East Greenland to Northwest Russia, there will be quite beneicial economic effects for isheries, gas and oil activities, in the area from Chukotka to Western Canadian Arctic it is predicted to be rather the opposite. Moreover, while the melting ice opens new sea routes, it may simultaneously create a risk of oil spills (from the Central Canadian Arctic to West Greenland)23. 19 F. Lasserre, Le passage du Nord-Ouest: une route maritime en devenir?, „La revue internationale et stratégique” 2001, Vol. 42, pp. 143, 148. 20 F. Lasserre, High North Shipping: Myths and Realities, op. cit., pp.192–193. 21 A. H. Hoel, The High North Legal-Political Regime, in: S. G. Holtsmark, B. A. Smith-Windsor (eds.), Security prospects in the High North: geostrategic thaw or freeze?, op. cit., p. 83. 22 A. H. Hoel, Climate change, in: O. S. Stokke, G. Hønneland, International Cooperation and Arctic Governance…, op. cit., p. 123. 23 Ibidem. The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 293 3. Who owns the Arctic? In 1925, by the inspiration of Canada, due to the principle of sector boundaries, the region was shared between Canada, the USA, Russia, Norway, Denmark (Greenland). The area of the particular state control was established between the eastern and western land end-point going up to the North Pole along the meridians. There were only two exceptions: Greenland as a whole was Danish and the archipelago of Svalbard – Norwegian. Iceland made no claims because those days Denmark was running its international policy under the personal union. Until the moment when the consequences of the climate change started to be visible in the High North there had been no need to change the status quo and rise any territorial claims. The new realities resulted in some contestations among the ive arctic states over the delineation of the 200 nautical mile limit of the Exclusive Economic Zones and the extension of the continental shelves. In the nineties the most important legal international framework agreement for the Arctic, the United Nation Convention on the Law of the Seas, came into force. It was signed by Norway in 1996, Russia in 1997, Canada in 2003 and in the following year by Denmark. The document still remains non-ratiied by the USA24. After the ratiication of the UNCLOS every country has ten years to submit at least preliminary information to formulate the future claims to extend its 200 miles (370 km) Exclusive Economic Zone25. The complex rules concerning the limits of right to continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles are set out in Article 76 of the UNCLOS but the main clue is to show the evidence that the continental shelf is going further in a natural way. Due to this, four years after the ratiication of the Sea Convention Russia as the irst one made claims for an enormous area of 1.3 million square kilometers, up to 90º North, as a part of the continental shelf. To support its claims a Russian Arctic expedition spectacularly left a lag at the depth of 4,261 meters at the geographic North Pole in August 2007. The UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) asked Russia to supply additional evidence to support its claims. As the second one, Norway made a submission to the CLCS in 2006 deining its rights over the continental shelf between mainland Norway, Jan Mayen and Svalbard and a less signiicant area of the continental shelf north beyond 200 nautical miles north of Svalbard. There has been no formal decision on this case yet. Besides those states more than 150 countries acceded to this framework. Until June 2008 states had ten years from the date of the ratiication of UNCLOS to make a submission. However, since 2008, they have been obliged to submit only a “preliminary information indicative of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles and a description of the status of preparation and intended date of making a submission” within a ten-year period. There is no formal deadline for a full submission now. See more online: http://www.mfa.is/publications/aifs/nr/4681 (access: August 22, 2010). 24 25 294 Agnieszka Ragin Maritime jurisdiction and territorial delimitations of the Arctic Ocean Source: IBRU / IBCAO. The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 295 There are some other territorial contestations among littoral states. One of the 40-years-long Russo-Norwegian conlicts about their Exclusive Economic Zones limits was resolved during the last visit of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev in Oslo in April 2010. Due to the compromise agreement the disputed area on the Barents Sea will be divided in half. Apart from marine boundaries claims in the Arctic there is one land territory dispute between Greenland and Canada about Hans Island, an islet in the Nares Strait, having a convenient location for the industrial activity. The sea territorial claims are nothing new on the world map. The truth is that “there are some 400 potential major marine boundaries in the world and less than half of them are resolved.”26 Nevertheless, it seems that none of them is supplied with oil and gas reserves so well in the century of searching for new reliable energy supplies. 4. Does the High North need the Arctic Treaty? As it was already mentioned, there only exist states which have Arctic sub-regions (not Arctic states as such). This is the reason why the Arctic is the subject of national regulations, some international treaties and customary international law. The UNCLOS is not the only document referring to the Arctic Ocean. The following should be mentioned here: Convention the Continental Shelf (1958, legally binding since 1964), the Agreement relating to the implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 (1994), the United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (1995), the Arctic Council Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines (1997, third version 2009), the International maritime Organization Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-Covered Waters (2002). Besides, every year the UN General Assembly approves resolutions on oceans and isheries providing guidance to the international community for the implementation of the law of the sea27. The Arctic does not have one legally binding treaty resembling the Antarctic Treaty that would protect the Arctic’s interests in the new realities due to the climate change. The discussion over this problem has become especially vibrant in the 21st century among the politicians and the scientists due to the rising interests in the Arctic, visible in media and in the policy developments of numerous countries28. Even if A. H. Hoel, The High North Legal-Political Regime…, op. cit., pp. 81–82. Ibidem, p. 84. 28 See more here: O. R. Young, The Arctic in Play: Governance in a Time of Rapid Change, op. cit.; O. S. Stokke, A legal regime for the Arctic? Interplay with the Law of the Sea Convention, „Marine Policy” 2007, Vol. 31; A.H. Hoel, Do We Need a New Legal Regime for the Arctic Ocean?, „The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law” 2009, Vol. 24; K.S. Yalowitz, J.F. Collins, R.A. Virginia, The Arctic Climate 26 27 296 Agnieszka Ragin some civil-society organizations, such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Nature Protection and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), had articulated the problem before,29 it was the European Union that made the idea more vocal and put this problem higher on the international agenda. This proposition was not the only one. There were others: the Environmental Treaty, the Arctic Charter, the Greenlandic-style self-government, the strengthened Arctic Council, and greater participation by organizations such as the International Maritime Organization30. As a region of strategic importance, with signiicant natural resources, the Arctic belongs to certain sovereign states, has permanent residents and, in many cases, advanced industrial activities. That is why a legally binding Arctic Treaty will most likely not be concluded. Most researchers agree that the existing governance framework based in particular on the UN Law of the Sea Convention provides a suficient legal basis for further development of the mechanisms and instruments. In the opinion of some scientists, the role, strength, and eficiency of the Arctic Council in governing the Arctic should grow. The Arctic Council as “a high level forum to provide a means for promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic States, with the involvement of the Arctic indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues, in particular issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic”31, has been already playing an important role in the Arctic administration. It was established in 1996 by eight Arctic states: Canada, Denmark (representing Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden and the United States. Apart from the above-mentioned, the status of the Permanent Participant of the Arctic Council was given to the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, the Saami Council and the Association of Indigenous Minorities in the Far North, Siberia, the Far East of the Russian Federation32. The observer status is still open to non-Arctic states, inter-governmental and inter-parliamentary organizations, global and regional and non-governmental organizations. So far, this status has been obtained by six countries: France, Germany, Poland, Spain, the Netherlands and United Kingdom. However, a few important players on the international scene – China, Japan, South Korea, Italy and the European Union – wish to have a more signiicant role in the Arctic Council. Change and Security Policy Conference. Final Report and Findings., Hanover, New Hampshire, December 2008. Available online: http://www.carnegieendowment.org/iles/arctic_climate_change.pdf, p. 20 (access August 12, 2010). 29 O.S. Stokke, A legal regime for the Arctic? Interplay with the Law of the Sea Convention, op. cit., p. 402. 30 K.S. Yalowitz, J.F. Collins, R.A. Virginia, The Arctic Climate Change and Security Policy Conference…., op. cit., p. 18. 31 http://arctic-council.org/ilearchive/Declaration%20on%20the%20Establishment%20of%20the%20 Arctic%20Council-1..pdf (access August 12, 2010). 32 Today Permanent Participants are: Aleut International Association (AIA), Arctic Athabaskan Council, Gwich’in Council International, ICC, Raipon, The Saami Council. See more here: http://arctic-council.org/section/permanent_participants (access: August 22, 2010). The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 297 One problem is deinitely worth highlighting here. Stakeholders agreed that the military security would not be an area of interest of the Arctic Council. However, this particular issue is deined in special national documents of almost all countries (Denmark is the only exception)33. Twelve years later, in May 2008, ive Arctic coastal states (Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Russian Federation, the United States) issued the Ilulissat Declaration, asserting their dominance in the region based on “their sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction in large areas of the Arctic Ocean”34. They declared active participation in the Arctic Council and other relevant international forums. 5. International repercussions of the changing Arctic The strategic signiicance of that region for the Russian Federation is incontrovertible. Not only does Russia have the longest coastline in the Arctic and the Arctic covers almost one third of the area of Russia, but also, which is the most important fact, the majority of the vast natural gas resources in the Arctic belong to this country. It is supposed that the Arctic shelf north of Siberia contains about 80 percent of the Russia’s potential hydrocarbon resources35. This is why Russia has been the most active player in the Arctic race so far. Fully covered by media, the incident of placing a Russian lag on the Arctic seabed in 2007 and the Russian claims for more than half of the Arctic natural resources is a public demonstration of the most important actor in the Arctic game. The situation is changing signiicantly in the case of Greenland, which is still politically and inancially tied to Copenhagen. One third of the yearly budget of this island, populated with 58 thousand people, comes from Denmark. The climate change deprives parts of Greenland of ice but – what is more important – makes hydrocarbons in the sea accessible. These valuable natural resources allow the Greenland’s society to strive for independence. Especially that the new agreement between Denmark and Greenland is not very proitable for Nuuk. Every 75 million Danish krone from the USA – National Security Presidential Directive-NSPD-66/ Homeland Security Presidential Directive–HSPD-25 (January 2009), available at: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-66.htm; Russian Federation – „Osnovy gosudarstvennot politiki Rossijskoj Federatsii v Arktike” (June 2001) and „Osnovy gosudarstvennot politiki Rossijskoj Federatsii v Arktike na period do 2020 goda i dalneishuiu perspektivu” (September 2008), http://www.scrf.gov.ru/documents/98.html; Canada – „Securing an Open Society: Canada’s National Security Policy” (April 2004), http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/docs/information/Publications/ natsec-secnat/natsec-secnat-eng.pdf and „An Integrated Arctic Strategy” (January 2008), http://www.itk.ca/ sites/default/iles/Integrated-Arctic-Stratgey.pdf; Norway – „Norwegian Government’s High North Strategy” (December 2006), see here: http://www.regjeringen.no/upload/UD/Vedlegg/strategien.pdf (access August 12, 2010). 34 Available at: http://www.oceanlaw.org/downloads/arctic/Ilulissat_Declaration.pdf (access August 12, 2010). 35 F. Lasserre, High North Shipping: Myths and Realities, op. cit., p. 185. 33 298 Agnieszka Ragin exploitation of the expected resources will be transferred to the Greenland budget, while the whole surplus – to Copenhagen. According to the experts, the proceeds from the sale of the hydrocarbons will reach the Danish level of subsidy in several years. This makes the agreement unproitable for the real owner of the resources. For the United States the beginning of the 21st century was not trouble-free and the Arctic is still not very high on the priority list of the White House Administration. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea is still unratiied by the USA. The fact that most of the oil resources in the Arctic lie close to Alaska should change the situation quite soon. However, not only the Arctic states are truly interested in the situation in the High North. What the new scenario for the Arctic means for China is shortening its distance to the northern countries of the European Union and North America – the major recipients for the Chinese products – by about 4,000 sea miles. It is hard to underestimate this fact, especially if 46 percent of this country’s income comes from commercial shipping. This is why China wishes to play a more important role in the Arctic Council and is so active in this region having sent four polar expeditions in the Arctic so far (1999, 2003, 2008, 2010). On July 1, 2010 the longest one started with 122 people on board, including scientists from more than 20 scientiic research units, whose aim is to examine the factors associated with the extensive melting of the sea ice and make a comprehensive study of the ecological systems of the region from several perspectives36. As it was mentioned, special interest of the European Union in the Arctic can be noted since the end of 2007. There are some important documents of the EU related to the Arctic: An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union (called as well The Blue Book), of October 2007, accompanied by the Action Plan; the Paper from the High Representative and the European Commission to the European Council of March 2008; the European Parliament resolution of 9 October 2008 on the Arctic governance; the Communication from the Commission to the EP and EC “The European Union and the Arctic Region” of November 200837. In the resolution, the European Commission was urged “to take a proactive role in the Arctic” and suggested “to be prepared to pursue the opening of international negotiations designed to lead to the adoption of an international treaty for the protection of the Arctic, having as its inspiration the Antarctic Treaty”38. There is no room here to analyze the EU policy towards the Arctic. However, it is a fact that the EU tries to be a global leader in combating Yu Lintao, Testing the Ice, „Beijing Review”, August 19, 2010, p. 42. See here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0575:FIN:EN:PDF; http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/reports/99387.pdf; http://www.europarl. europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-2008-0474; http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/arctic_region/docs/com_08_763_en.pdf (access: August 12, 2010). 38 See: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P6-TA-20080474; (p. 14, 15) (access: August 12, 2010). 36 37 The effects of the climate change in the Arctic 299 the climate change, generously subsidizing research on this phenomenon and having obliged the EU member states to follow the ambitious climate-energy legislative package (3x20 until 2020). At the same time, the European Union tends to look at the Arctic Ocean as a part of the Mediterranean European territory, which highlights a special relation with the Arctic region39. Those arguments were repeated inter alia by Janos Herman, Ambassador and Head of the Delegation of the European Union to Norway on the last Arctic Frontier Conference at Tromsø40 and the year before – in January 2009 – by Dr Joe Borg, Member of the European Commission Responsible for Fisheries and Maritime Affairs41. That clariies also the EU request for the permanent observer status in the Arctic Council and a more signiicant role in the discussion about the Arctic’s isheries, energy resources, new shipping routes, environmental protection and climate threats as well as the security concerns. However, what is quite obvious for the European Administration is questionable for many other stakeholders in the Arctic. 6. The Arctic in the climate change realities. Ecological and economic dilemmas In the common social perception the Arctic tends to be seen as the pristine, untouched nature reservoir in the inaccessible High North. However, the reality is much different from this image. In fact, the Arctic is already a place of the world-class industrial activities42. Global warming makes the level of industrial activities in the Arctic higher. The solid foundation of the scientiic knowledge about the climate change and biodiversity „The European Union is inextricably linked to the Arctic region (…) by a unique combination of history, geography, economy and scientiic achievements. Three Member States — Denmark (Greenland), Finland and Sweden — have territories in the Arctic. Two other Arctic states — Iceland and Norway — are members of the European Economic Area. Canada, Russia and the United States are strategic partners of the EU. European Arctic areas are a priority in the Northern Dimension policy. Beyond areas of national jurisdiction, the Arctic Ocean contains parts pertaining to the high seas and the seabed managed by the International Seabed Authority.” See online: http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/arctic_region/docs/ com_08_763_en.pdf; „Introduction”, p. 2. (access: August 12, 2010). 40 Arctic Frontiers 2010, Living in the High North, Tromsø; see here: http://webtv.uit.no/mediasite/Vie wer/?peid=5025e20669574dc0b11cf37176b0b7fe (access: August 12, 2010). 41 Arctic Frontiers 2009, The Age of the Arctic, Tromsø; available online: http://webtv.uit.no/mediasite/ Viewer/?peid=148e2ee7-80ea-4033-8baf-98a0b1977ffe (access: August 12,2010). 42 „The Prudhoe Bay oil ield is the largest ever discovered in North America. The super giant gas ields of northwestern Siberia are critical to Russia’s efforts to reconstruct the country’s economy. Nickel and lead/ zinc mines located in the Arctic are among the largest in the world. The industrial isheries of the Bering, Norwegian, and Barents Seas igure prominently in the world harvest of marine living resources. Diamonds from Siberia and Canada’s Northwest Territories now account for a sizable share of the world market”. See online AHDR: http://www.svs.is/AHDR/AHDR%20chapters/English%20version/AHDR_chp%2013.pdf; p. 239 (access: August 12, 2010). 39 300 Agnieszka Ragin conservation already exists. Useful guidance on how to reduce risks correlated with the actions that involve hazards to the Arctic environment and the Arctic residents has been also prepared43. Even though a sustainable development – a balance between social needs, market desires and environmental security – is a declared political objective for the Arctic states, the economic perspectives are extremely lucrative and highly dangerous at the same time for the fragile ecosystem of the High North. Every single activity in this region is socially and economically valuable, as it gives wealth and work in the broadly understood petroleum industry, ishing and in vessel transport, provides tax revenues for local governments (like the North Slope Borough) and is a source of income for regional governments (like the State of Alaska and the Sakha Republic). However, simultaneously, the same may cause signiicant instabilities in many parts of the region. Oil and gas ields are non-renewable and as so they are exhaustible. Moreover, extractive industries are generally controlled by multinational corporations, which are more responsive to global forces than to local concerns and their income relies on the global situation of the market44. There is no doubt that any intensive action undertaken by the human and industrial activity in the Arctic will not only be invasive and harmful to the natural biodiversity reservoir but will also signiicantly affect the indigenous population of the High North. The voice of the indigenous people is quite audibly heard in the international debate forum since their everyday life depends on the Arctic. In their statements it is articulated that the oil and gas activity in the High North combined with the lack of action in mitigating and combating the climate change are threats to their lifestyles and traditional activities (such as reindeer herding, hunting, ishing and gathering). In many international debates their dramatic appeals to take a determined action to combat the climate change are more and more present. The climate change imposes new requirements on the existing institutions (national, regional, sub-regional, circumpolar, transnational, global) and gives a signiicant role to the international cooperation. Nevertheless, we can observe single state policies and actions in the ield of environmental protection rather than a collective strategy of the international community on how to deal with the global warming problem. The reason for this is that politically the world is composed of the states which try to combat the environmental problems and the climate change by controlling their 43 The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004) and the Arctic Human Development Report (2004) have fundamental signiicance. The former, an impressive result of the work of more than 300 scientists from 15 countries, evaluates the state of knowledge about that issue and creates scenarios for the Arctic. The latter addresses a variety of topics concerning the High North: the Arctic demography, societies and culture, economic, political and legal systems, resource governance, community viability, human health and well-being, education and gender studies, and inally – circumpolar international relations and geopolitics. 44 http://www.svs.is/AHDR/AHDR%20chapters/English%20version/Chapters%20PDF.htm(access: August 12, 2010). 301 The effects of the climate change in the Arctic own policies. However, international institutions demonstrate a rising trend all around the world. Also in the High North, the role of international management and governance has increased during the past 20 years. * * * Global warming is changing the Arctic with its unique potential into a very attractive target in the agenda of the most powerful actors on the international scene. In the 21st-century reality of depleting reliable oil and gas reserves, the High North is constantly gaining in value. We cannot exclude any of the future scenarios for the region. Aside from the Arctic countries, various dominant actors, such as China, Japan, South Korea and the European Union, wish to play a more signiicant role in the discussion about the Arctic and in the decision-making process in the region as well. The Arctic has recently started to be present in the NATO sphere of interest, too. “What is very clear is that the High North is going to require even more of the Alliance’s attention in the coming years”, said the former General Secretary of NATO, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, in 2009, noting that NATO is not going to act as an arbiter but will provide a forum for discussion and sharing any concerns of the Arctic coastal states45. It seems that we are now just at the beginning of “the Arctic game”. 45 Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Reykjavik, January 29, 2009.