1 / 31

Intensive Summer Course 2011 University of Iceland, Reykjavik

Strategies in the Arctic: Ilmplications for Small States Dr. Lassi Heininen University of Lapland, Finland Northern Research Forum. Intensive Summer Course 2011 University of Iceland, Reykjavik. The early-21st century Arctic.

raguilar
Download Presentation

Intensive Summer Course 2011 University of Iceland, Reykjavik

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Strategies in the Arctic: Ilmplications for Small StatesDr. Lassi HeininenUniversity of Lapland, FinlandNorthern Research Forum Intensive Summer Course 2011 University of Iceland, Reykjavik

  2. The early-21st century Arctic Main themes / trends of the post-Cold War circumpolar geopolitics and IR: 1) Increasing circumpolar coop by indigenous peoples’ organizations and sub-national governments 2) Region-building with unified states as major actors 3) New kind of relationship between the circumpolar North and the outside world (Arctic Human Development Report, 2004)

  3. Special features of Northern security Technology models of geopolitics Nuclear safety Interrelations between the environment and security / the military Relations between Indigenous peoples and security / the military Climate change and other environ problems (Global) Energy security

  4. Nuclear safety Radioactivity as a local and regional pollutant, and an example of environmental ‘awakening’ Risk and threat – military and civilian Became a special issue for and in international Arctic cooperation between Arctic states E.g. AEPS, BEAC, AMEC, MNEP Caused a change in problem definition on security discourse and premise in the Arctic But how real was / is the change?

  5. Behind: First significant geopolitical change The ultimate aim of state politics: to decrease military tension and increase political stability From state hegemony and power politics into sophisticated policy, esp. cooperation on environ protection The used means: trans-boundary cooperation and region-building… .. and new ‘soft’ institutions - e.g. Arctic Council As a result: decreased military and political tension, and increased stability and peace From confrontation to cooperation A success story – ‘Mission accomplished!’

  6. Behind: New concepts of security The very meaning of security was extended (in discourses) beyond traditional concerns with ‘military’ threats and national security to focus on environmental and human problems Different discourses and concepts of security with different premises and paradigms Due to e.g. long-range air and water pollution, nuclear safety and climate change

  7. The early-21st century Arctic continues.. A peaceful region with high stability based on a wide intergovernmental and regional cooperation No conflicts, but disputes on maritime borders and asymmetric environmental conflicts Major challenges e.g. climate change and long-range air and water pollution, and globalization Legally and politically divided by national borders and internal waters (of the Arctic states) Major military structures (nuclear weapon systems) and capability for national defence are still there Importance of national interests

  8. The Arctic States The role and position of the Arctic states was changed due to the first geopolitical change – the A8+ was defined The five littoral states with their ministerial ad hoc meetings – the A5 was defined (and the Arctic redefined?) The states emphasize the importance of the AC but have their own interests, agendas, priorities and policies They have recently also accepted their arctic/northern strategy/policy A state still the most important actor in the Arctic, but .. .. there are new actors (with their interests) and challenges as well as threats --- The post-Cold War period is over!?

  9. Arctic states: summary of the priorities - Sovereignty and national defence: Five littoral states - Comprehensive security: Finland, Iceland and Sweden - Economic development: All the strategies - Regional development and infra: Most of the strategies - Transportation: Finland, Iceland, Russia and USA -- Aviation: Iceland and Russia - Environment: Most of the strategies - Governance: All the strategies -- Safety/Rescue: Finland, Iceland, Norway and Russia • Peoples/Indigenous peoples: Most of the strategies • Science/Scientific coop: Most of the strategies

  10. Arctic states: main priorities / objectives Sove/ Econ/ Trans Envir Gov Peo/ Scien Can x x+x x x x DK/Gr x x+x x x Fin /x x+x x x x /x x Ice /x x x x x+x x x Nor x x+x x x+x /x x Rus x x+x x x+x /x x Swe x x x x/x USA x x x x x x (Heininen, Arctic Strategies & Policies: Inventory & Comparative Study, 2011)

  11. International Cooperation - UNs: Canada, Den&Green, Finland, Sweden, USA - UNCLOS: Canada, Den&Green, Finland, Swe, USA, EU - IMO: Canada, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, EU - AC: All the strategies - EU: Den&Green, Finland, Iceland, Russia, Sweden - EU’s ND: Den&Green, Fin, Ice, Nor, Swe, EU - Nordic: Den&Green, Fin, Ice, Nor, Swe - BEAC: Fin, Ice, Nor, Rus, Swe, EU

  12. Self-identification and (re)definition as an Arctic / Northern country / nation / power • Canada: “the global leader in Arctic science; “The North is central to the Canadian national identity” • Den&Green: the Kingdom as a “major player in the Arctic” • Finland: as an “Arctic country is a natural actor in the Arctic region” • Iceland: “the only country located entirely within the Arctic region” • Norway: “the High North is gradually becoming more synonymous with the Arctic”…“really a Norwegian perspective” • Russia: to “maintain the role of a leading Arctic power” • Sweden: “there are many connections to tie Sweden to the Arctic” • USA: an “Arctic nation”

  13. Finland • Strategy for the Arctic Region, adopted by the Finnish Cabinet Committee on European Union of the Gvt. (June 2010) • The main substantial sectors of the Strategy: • The environment (‘fragile Arctic nature’) • Economic activity and know-how • Transport and infrastructure • Indigenous peoples

  14. Interesting findings • Comprehensive and wide (global) perspective • Emphasizes the Arctic as a stable and peaceful area • Recognizes the special features and risks of the fragile arctic ecosystem; supports research as a basis for decision-making • Highest priorities of the Strategy appear to be economic interests (esp. marine traffic and infrastructure) • --- Is there a contradiction? • Supports indigenous participation in international cooperation (no ratification of ILO 169 Convention) • Emphasizes the importance of the multilateral northern cooperation, and supports the AC as the main forum.. • .. and the role (and importance) of the EU in the Arctic region

  15. Iceland • ‘Iceland in the High North’ published by the Icelandic MFA (September 2009) • ‘Parliamentary Resolution on Iceland’s Arctic Policy’ with twelve principles (March 2011) • The six highlights of the Report are: • International cooperation • Security through international cooperation • Resource development and environ protection • Transportation • People and cultures • Inter coop on research and monitoring

  16. Interesting findings • No emphasis on sovereignty, but rather on international, multilateral and regional cooperation • Security and (maritime) safety through international and scientific cooperation • Emphasis on the importance of resource development, incl. renewable energy and fishing industry; less emphasis on environmental protection • Visions and strong expectations of global trans-arctic shipping routes, and aviation – a potential trans-shipment hub • Emphasis on inter coop on research and higher education • Iceland located “entirely within the Arctic region” – a response to the ad hoc meetings of five littoral states

  17. Sweden • A Strategy for policy in the Arctic region (Sveriges strategi för den arktiska regionen), adopted by the Swedish Government in May 2011 • The three areas, which are defined as the priorities: - climate and the environment - economic development - the human dimension

  18. Interesting findings • Adopted and launched at the same day, when Sweden started its chairmanship of the AC • Much the same priorities (lack of time or ?) • Among the three priorities economic development, much oil and gas, is the most rich and multifunctional, even some sort of top, priority of the Strategy • The Strategy also clearly states that multilateral cooperation in, and dealing with, the Arctic is the main priority for Sweden

  19. New threats, challenges or change(s)?

  20. Behind: another significant change, or potential threat A significant multifunctional - environmental, geoeconomic and geopolitical - change has occurred at the early-21st E.g. growing global interest toward the region and its rich natural resources E.g. a manifold growth in the geo-strategic importance of the region Among indicators of the change climate change, energy security, sovereignty (Ilulissat meeting), globalization

  21. Reflection/response to the change(s) • Canada: yes • Denmark&Greenland: yes, and no (self-governing) • Finland: yes • Iceland: yes • Norway: not really (Russia) • Russia: no (pragmatic means for domestic politics) • Sweden: yes • USA: yes -- Global perspective incl: Den&Green and Finland

  22. Indicators of the recent change Climate change and its (physical) impacts Utilization of natural resources (e.g. shelf of the AO) Energy security, and options of that Transportation (e.g. global sea and air routes) Globalization and flows of globalization Growing global interest toward the region by powers from outside the region Growing interest of, and activity by, the Arctic states to (re)define their national interests, and… … (re)emphasize state sovereignty

  23. Globalization in the Arctic • Globalization bringing problems to the North!? • Negative: impacts of climate change, privatization, modernity (‘Cola-Colanization’), new isms, weakening of nation-states’ ability to protect its northern communities (sovereignty) from new threat • Positive: decolonization and growth of regional autonomy, recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights, emphasis on the rule of law and multilateral environ initiatives, new ICT, ‘diversity’ as a global value (Globalization and the Circumpolar North, 2010)

  24. Global problems in the Arctic • Global relations are nothing new - e.g. fur trade, whaling, sealing, and colonialism, exploration, (pre)industrialization • Global security problems – e.g. militarization and nuclear weapon system • Global environ problems: long-range air and water pollution, esp. nuclear safety, and environmental ’awakening’ • Also growing consciousness of own identity, world-wide approach by indigenous peoples, democratization, self-government and regionalization (Globalization and the Circumpolar North, 2010)

  25. Climate change • Climate change as a global environmental problem (with its physical impacts and the associated ‘uncertainty’) • Thus, it has a relevant security dimension – either a danger, risk or uncertain thing, threat or challenge • Climate change has already caused a change in Northern geopolitics and problem definition on security discourse(s), and has potential to cause that on security premise(s) • What about security paradigm, or, is climate change a new discipline for ‘disciplining’? • To remind that ‘nuclear safety’ already caused a change in security discourse(s) and premise(s) at the late of 1990s!

More Related