Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The Arctic has for long been a portion of the earth surface that is
characterised by severe atmospheric condition as a result of the huge
amount of ice formations. As a matter of fact, about seventy five
percent of the arctic regions are inhabitable due to the extreme
coldness of the area.
Over time, countries of the world especially those who surround the
region do not see much importance in the sovereignty of the region
despite the vast resources underneath the ice formations.
With the recent depletion of the ozone layer and the attendant
consequence of the melting of the region, the arctic is becoming more
and more accessible with the modern sophisticated vessels. It has also
been recently discovered that the
November,2007
BY
INTRODUCTION
The Arctic is the region around the North Pole with series of Islands,
Ice-formations and Seas. The region has an extensive territorial
expanse of a frozen hinterland but with melting Polar ice caps.
Prior to the 19th century, the Arctic was not given much importance
because of the ice formations. In short, the condition of the Arctic has
not made it to be that accessible. With the recent incidences of global
warming, the polar ice caps have been melting at unprecedented rate.
The implication of this is that, the ice may soon pave way for a more
accessible and exploitable Arctic. With the melting, the Arctic becomes
more and more navigable. In essence, the immense oil reserve could be
exploited and the need to claim sovereignty over this area becomes one
of contest.
This paper will consider the practice of rights of ownership over the
Arctic prior to the regime of the UNCLOS and the post-UNCLOS regime
of ownership as it affects the Arctic region.
The territory of the Arctic could be divided into: Lands (both discovered
and undiscovered), the ice formations, the sea region and then air
region. All of these will be discussed separately for the purpose of lucid
exposition.
The rigours of climate and other physical conditions could not make
lands in the arctic to be acquired in the orthodox legal method. Hence,
the principle of “effective occupation” has been substituted with the
fact that sovereignty ought to attach to littoral State according to
“region of attraction”.
This has been the practice of the Arctic States and even similar
practice occurs in the Antarctic. This is how all the arctic States
3
acquired sovereignty over all the lands and islands in their sector of
“region of attraction”. Hence, it is not open for a Non-Arctic State to
acquire any portion of land in the arctic. This is so because they don’t
have any reasonable interest in the Arctic except those that are
scientific.
The government of various Arctic State have declared that all lands and
islands discovered or yet to be discovered which is located between the
country and the Pole fall under the territory of the State in question.
ICE FORMATIONS
It is obvious from scientific researches in the Arctic that the area of ice
and water are greater than that of land. There are various forms of ice
formations in the Arctic. There are ice-fields of a more permanent
nature, some are floating ice. There are various schools of thought as
to the legal status of ice-formations. Some argued that all ice
formations should be treated as part of the sea as they are not lands.
Some argued that only the floating ice formation is regarded as part of
4
the sea while those are of permanent nature be regarded as land.
Another set of jurists posit that the floating ice formations could be
likened to a ship. If a ship is capable of ownership, then floating ice
formations could form part of the territory (land) and be subject of
ownership. It must be noted however that there is no agreed practice of
Polar states in this area.
SEA REGION
The sea region that are under consideration are waters that are outside
the ‘’territorial water’’ of the Arctic states. As a result of lack of
established practice in the Arctic, there has been divergence of opinion
on the legal status of the sea region of the Arctic. Writers like Waultrin
and Balch classified such seas as high seas and as such are not
subject of ownership of the Arctic States.
Lakhtine after reviewing all the doctrines stated above however asserts
that taking into account the peculiarities of the Arctic Ocean and the
legal status of the adjacent territories and ice, the doctrine of high sea
will be quite unsatisfactory when applied to the Arctic region. He
concluded that sovereignty should attach to the polar states over the
Arctic Ocean within their sectors of attraction however with qualified
5
jurisdiction with respect to right of innocent passage of all naval
vessels.
AIR REGION
It goes without saying that a state has sovereignty over all the
territorial limits of the state including the atmosphere. Hence, the polar
state has sovereignty over the air region of the part of their territorial
although with qualified jurisdiction in terms of innocent passage of
aircraft of foreign sovereign. However, it is not clear whether the polar
states have sovereignty over the polar seas. This arises because of the
opinion that the Polar sea forms part of the high sea and it is mare
liberum.
6
jurisdiction to a distance of 200 nautical miles while other nations
extended theirs by twelve nautical miles.
The second conference was held in 1960 but did not result in any
international agreement. The United Nations conference on Law of the
sea (UNCLOS) is the international agreement that resulted from the
third UNCLOS conference that took place between 1973 to 1982. The
convention came into force in 1994.
Under the UNCLOS, a coastal state now has sovereignty over the
following:
• Internal water: This covers all waters and water ways on the
landward side of the base line.
7
• Territorial waters: This covers twelve nautical miles from the baseline
Under the convention, all waters outside these ones stated form part of
the high seas. The convention establishes an international seabed
Authority to be responsible for the administration of the resource of the
high seas. The ISA is to grant licenses to minners and whoever is to
exploit the high seas. The royalty generated by the ISA is to be
distributed among nations of the world. (For developmental purpose)
Since the coming into force of the convention, no Arctic state could
claim sovereignty over an area beyond two hundred nautical miles of
its baseline. Hence, all theories as to the ownership of the sea regions
8
and ice-formations in the Arctic prior to 1994 may no longer hold water
today as the law has change in this area.
Meanwhile, the convention allows for claims for the extension of the
territorial waters of a State and a commission on the limit of the
continental shelf was established to see into such claims when they
arise. It should be noted that a country could only have genuine claim
if she could prove that her land extended beyond the two hundred
nautical miles. Norway ratified the convention in 1996, Russia (1997),
Canada (2003) and Denmark did in 2004. The United State is yet to
ratify the convention. Russia made the first claim in 2001. Others are
still preparing their facts. What the outcome of the commission will
remains anyone’s guess.
It has been suggested that Russia may make the stronger claim to
some sector of the Arctic. This is so because; she has been making
serious efforts towards effective occupation of the Arctic.
The country happens to be the first to get to the floor of the Arctic
Ocean. She’s the first to plant her flag in the Arctic. All these are
indices that will favourably work for Russia at the commission.
CONCLUSION
The issue of the scramble for the Arctic is a very serious one with the
sudden melting of the ice formations. Greater advantages are coming.
It could be a faster route between Europe, Asia and even America. The
oil reserve could make it to be add or die affair as the US is battling
with how to destabilize OPEC and gain control of the international oil
market.
9
It has also been suggested that Russia’s flag is most benign than
most, reflective of a more ‘’ aggressive ‘’ Russia, seeking to reclaim
through energy dominance, the global stature once held by the Soviet
Union. The country believes that the “Arctic always was Russia, and it
will remain Russia ‘’. Any recommendation to the contrary by the UN
commission may be disregarded by Russia. With the current trend
between Russia and United States, the scramble for the Arctic may be
sending the world back to the cold war if military actions will not be
used to defend the Arctic regions.
REFERENCES
2) Andrew Chung: The Arctic Cold War, August (2007): The Star.
Com
4) en.wikipedia.org
10
10) D.J Harris: Cases Materials On International Law Fifth
Edition
11