Territorial Claims in the Arctic Circle: An Explainer
Isabelle Wallace, Online Staff Writer
September 25, 2020
Barentsburg is a quaint town tucked into the treacherous coast of Svalbard. Svalbard is an Norwegian Arctic archipelago, yet the town is almost exclusively inhabited by Russians. Fit with a Russian consulate despite only having a population under 500, Barentsburg is a Soviet tentacle: a ‘soft’ power in the North, but administered by the behemoth Kremlin. There are many Russian tentacles within the Arctic Circle, popping up in the forms of military bases, coal mines and tourism projects.
Russia is not the only state with a desire for land, marine resources and authority in the Arctic Circle. There are seven other Countries that sit at the Arctic Council roundtable: Canada, Greenland (Denmark), Finland, Iceland, Norway,Sweden and the United States. Notably, about half of the Arctic Circle is bordered by the northern Russian coast, while the seven other members are adjoined to the remaining half.
The scramble for claiming land in the Arctic Circle has been fuelled by refinements to international law as well as a promise of lucrativity from oil and gas reserves. Lately, territorial disputes have generally been on the backburner.
The Arctic Circle is the polar region of Earth north of 66°33’ N. There are five different types of territory within this circle: land, internal waters, territorial seas, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), and international waters. Internal waters are waters adjacent to land, such as bays or rivers. Territorial seas are seas that extend for up to 12 nautical miles beyond land. EEZs are seas that extend 200 nautical miles from land where a sovereign state can exercise exclusive rights to marine resources. International waters are seas subject to customary international law rather than sovereign jurisdiction.
The 200 nautical-mile region off the coast of a state is called its maritime border. On a map of the Arctic Circle, the current maritime borders leave an unclaimed triangle-shaped region of international waters that reaches across the North Pole and some of the Arctic ocean.
Essentially, this territory is obtainable to any country that is able to prove that it belongs to them. Territorial claims are processed via the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This treaty came into effect in 1994 to refine and replace the old ‘freedom of the seas’ principle: a passive and paradoxical principle leaving international waters belonging to both all and none. UNCLOS provides countries with a ten year post-ratification period to submit a territorial claim before being rendered ineligible to claim arctic territory. ‘Proof’ equals sound geological evidence that a naturally-prolonged continental shelf extends beyond a country’s maritime border and into international water.
A country making a territorial claim submits their case to the United Nations’ Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS). The CLCS is made up of scientists who assess the validity of a country's claim. There is no political or stakeholder influence, and the CLCS does not determine territorial borders. In the case of valid but overlapping claims between multiple countries, it is up to the countries to resolve delimitation disputes.
There are some pending territorial disputes. A large portion of the arctic international waters as well as the north pole is claimed by both Greenland (Denmark) and Russia. A Canadian claim overlaps onto part of this area too. The CLCS requested more evidence from Russia, which they submitted in 2015. The claims remain unresolved.
Hans Island, wedged in the strait between Greenland and Ellesmere Island, is a point of contention between Denmark and Canada. Both countries claim the island. Splitting the land into two equal parts is on the table along with shared dominium under a condominium regime. Discussions have remained gridlocked and neither country has made progress with their claim.
Canada and the USA dispute whether Canada has a right to control which vessels can enter the Northwest Passage. The passage technically runs through Canadian internal waters, but the passage is recognized globally as international waters. Canada wants to limit which vessels can enter in the interest of climate change. The US rejected this notion in hopes of maximum freedom of navigation. The US has yet to ratify UNCLOS, leaving a deadline for any formal territorial claim undetermined.
Motivation for territorial claims is dichotomous. Sovereignty means an ability for Canada to create the policy that can help protect arctic ecosystems. It also means commercial use, like drilling, fishing, or shipping, all of which come with an environmental footprint. However, commercial interest that drives territorial claims in part exists because of climate change. Melted ice coverage equals easier access to drilling sites. It also mean new shipping routes with longer periods of passability that connect Asia to the West.
Russia leads in level of interest in the Arctic Circle, but the other seven northern contenders cannot overlook the opportunity for sovereignty over a piece of the Arctic. The arctic is an opportunity for a stake in its preservation or commercial use rather than a peripheral hinterland. Countries should be thorough in building their case for ownership beyond a maritime border, or someone else will.