Historic Waters in International Law with Special Reference to the Arctic

1971 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donat Pharand
Keyword(s):  
Special Reference ◽  
International Law ◽  
The Arctic

scholarly journals Desecuritization as Displacement of Controversy: geopolitics, law and sovereign rights in the Arctic

Politik ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Jacobsen ◽  
Jeppe Strandsbjerg
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
North Pole ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Securitization Theory ◽  
The Media ◽  
The One

By signing the Ilulissat Declaration of May 2008, the five littoral states of the Arctic Ocean pre-emptively desecuritized potential geopolitical controversies in the Arctic Ocean by confirming that international law and geo-science are the defining factors underlying the future delimitation. This happened in response to a rising securitization discourse fueled by commentators and the media in the wake of the 2007 Russian flag planting on the geographical North Pole seabed, which also triggered harder interstate rhetoric and dramatic headlines. This case, however, challenges some established conventions within securitization theory. It was state elites that initiated desecuritization and they did so by shifting issues in danger of being securitized from security to other techniques of government. Contrary to the democratic ethos of the theory, these shifts do not necessarily represent more democratic procedures. Instead, each of these techniques are populated by their own experts and technocrats operating according to logics of right (law) and accuracy (science). While shifting techniques of government might diminish the danger of securitized relations between states, the shift generates a displacement of controversy. Within international law we have seen controversy over its ontological foundations and within science we have seen controversy over standards of science. Each of these are amplified and take a particularly political significance when an issue is securitized via relocation to another technique. While the Ilulissat Declaration has been successful in minimizing the horizontal conflict potential between states it has simultaneously given way for vertical disputes between the signatory states on the one hand and the Indigenous peoples of the Arctic on the other.

The Role of the Arctic Council from an International Law Perspective: Past, Present and Future

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 349-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshinobu Takei
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Treaty Negotiations ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Law Making

Established in 1996, the Arctic Council has played an essential role in promoting pan- Arctic cooperation on various issues concerning the Arctic. Increasingly, its activities have contributed to the development of international law relating to the Arctic in terms of law-making and implementation. Recent developments make it pertinent to investigate the possibilities and challenges faced by the Arctic Council in developing legally binding instruments and otherwise contributing to the development of international law relating to the Arctic. How has the Council been engaged in activities that contribute to the development of international law? What factors have affected these activities? This article describes the structure of the Arctic Council and its status under international law; analyzes important developments relating to this issue in the period before the 2009 Ministerial Meeting held in Tromsø, Norway; examines the processes in which two legally binding instruments were negotiated and eventually adopted as well as elements common to these agreements; and discusses Arctic Council processes relevant to the development of international law other than treaty negotiations under its auspices.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document