Russian and American Interests in Arctic Coincide

Recently Denmark, Norway and Canada have become much more active regarding the Arctic, especially regarding the appropriation of some territories there rich with resources. On many Danish maps, vast Arctic territories up to the North Pole, including some Icelandic and Canadian ones, are claimed to be subject to Denmark. Similar situations may also be seen on some Norwegian maps. According to them, the Arctic boundaries of Norway not only reach the North Pole, partly to account for some Icelandic Arctic regions, but even reach the Russian Karskoye Sea and Franz-Josef Archipelago, embracing almost all of the Russian Arctic.

As Russian and world media have repeatedly reported, Norway often unilaterally restricts foreign economic activities on the Svalbard and its surrounding waters. This directly breaches the provisions of the 1920 Paris international treaty regarding the Svalbard: Notwithstanding the sovereignty of Norway, all countries that have signed this document are allowed to carry out free economic activities on this archipelago and its surrounding waters.

Canada’s position, judging by the statements of many of its current government ministers, is inclined to consider all of the Arctic that touches North America as exclusively Canadian. This derogates the apparent interests of Danish Greenland and Alaska. Thus, priorities for Russia and the United States should be to protect their Arctic interests and oppose unilateral Arctic appropriations.

Former suggestions of Russia and Iceland to call the Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region to find a compromise solution regarding territorial problems, and others in this region that have not been realized yet. Much is at stake because the Arctic region is where up to one-fourth of the world’s total oil and gas supplies is concentrated, to say nothing about the abundance of high-priced sea-product resources.

Maybe only the Russian Federation and the U.S. have no problems with respect to boundaries further north of the Bering Strait—that is, in the Arctic itself. Moreover, America has experience with solving numerous ethnic, social, economic and ecological problems in Alaska. This experience, many experts believe, may be of use to Russia. As to the differences Washington, D.C. and Ottawa have in respect to the Arctic, some North American and Scandinavian media believe Canada could even stop the transit of oil and oil products from Alaska to the main territory of the U.S. by shutting down the Alaska Oil Pipeline.

Thus, on one side, Russia, the U.S. and Iceland stand for solving Arctic problems respecting the whole region. On the other side, Canada, Norway and Denmark prefer to unilaterally realize their own interests in the region.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper recently stated his intent to send military ice-breakers to protect Arctic areas joining Canada from "claims" made by the U.S., Russia and Denmark. The new conservative government has elaborated on certain plans for the Arctic. They provide for, in particular, the construction and placement of three military ice-breakers in Arctic waters, setting up a network of observation points and radar control along the entire Arctic coast of the country, and on the islands of the Arctic Archipelago. This could stretch to the North Pole.

Experts believe that such actions are influenced by the fact that, as Arctic ice disappears, the Northwest Passage from the North Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean near Canada—which has been considered theoretical—may become real in the foreseeable future. And possible dividends and economic benefits from control over this area will bring in astronomical sums of money for Canada.

David Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, first officially articulated America’s reaction to these Canadian plans. He stated that his country "stands against the intentions of Canada and, as most countries, does not recognize its claims to the Arctic." The ambassador also emphasized that, "in the opinion of the U.S.A., future Northwest Passage is situated, not in Canadian, but in international Arctic waters." At the same time, the Canadian prime minister simply stated that "the United States will protect their sovereignty, and the Canadian government will protect our sovereignty."

Russia, the U.S. and Iceland need to jointly protect their interests in the Far North from the actions of other countries in the Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region as quickly as possible. In the opinion of the Icelandic minister of social affairs, Arni Magnussen, "in the broader context, the region will need some analogue of the 1975 Helsinki conference in order to avoid conflicts: compromise the accommodation of economic interests and internationally recognized boundaries in Arctic."

By Alexei Baliev