Research on Current International Cooperation in the Context of Economic Rediscovery of the Arctic

ZHANG XiaTU Jingfang

Research on Current International Cooperation in the Context of Economic Rediscovery of the Arctic

ZHANG Xia*TU Jingfang**

The history of the Arctic has been integrated into world history through the process of European colonization against the backdrop of globalization in the course of the world’s rediscovery of Arctic geography,military significance,and economic potential.The rapid melt of the permanent ice cap in the Arctic has launched and accelerated the final regional process of economic rediscovery.During this period of rediscovery,the peaceful use of the Arctic may be confronted with two main challenges:sustainable development and strategic security.For the purpose of establishing general rules,there are two approaches of cooperation:the regional approach(in small groups)and the global approach(in large groups);for the purpose of strengthening practical benefits,bilateral cooperation is frequent and active.For the cooperation of countries inside and outside the Arctic and among those countries outside the Arctic,besides the large-group approach,a more important method of cooperation is based on the current bilateral cooperative framework(such as strategic cooperation relationship,allies etc.).The Arctic is currently in the stage of strategic preparation for entry into the global market,so competition for leadership in making rules and schemes has become the main focus and policy orientation in the region.All countries ultimately attempt to be the leading player in making new rules for Arctic development and utilization that are beneficialto themselves,whether by cooperating in small or large groups.

The Arctic;International Cooperation;Subjects and Issues of Cooperation;Approaches to Cooperate;Order in Arctic Cooperation

Ⅰ.Historical Background of International Cooperation on Arctic Affairs

The history of the Arctic has been integrated into world history by the process of European colonization against the backdrop of globalization in the course of the world’s rediscovery of Arctic geography,military significance,and economic potential.The rapid melt of the permanent ice cap in the Arctic has launched and accelerated the final regional process of the economic rediscovery.

Contrary to the case of the Antarctic,human beings have a long history of discovery,activity,and settlement in the Arctic,which dates back 10,000 years.①Editing Team of Research on Arctic Affairs ed.,Research on Arctic Affairs,Beijing:O-cean Press,2010,p.27.However,such activities and settlement were isolated from the rest of the world.In the year 1500,a very special historic moment for the Arctic,a Portuguese named Corte Real,who was appointed by King Manuel I to look for a trade route to Asia,discovered and landed on Greenland on the way of his mission,which initiated the subsequent,lengthy period of over 400 years of geographical discovery and colonization of the Arctic(ending with the Norwegian Amundsen’s first completion of the entire journey through the Northwest Passage on his vessel Gjøa).Coincidently,the year of 1500 is deemed by many people the starting year of globalization in the modern sense.②Marx indicated that globalization started from the 1500s in his article Modern Capitalism, cited from ZHANG Yuyan et al ed.,Globalization and Development of China,Beijing: Social Science Press,2007,p.61.From this moment on,the Arctic,no longer isolated from world history,would be involved in the shaping of world history by capitalism in its early period:offering,if sometimes illusively,trade footholds on the new route to Asia.In the process,the Arctic was unavoidably colonized while European settlers expelled,conquered, governed,and then assimilated and domesticated aboriginal peoples.

Later on,although trade footholds(such as the northern area of Canada and the Far East area of Russia)had been established,the exploration of searoutes was hindered by the difficulty of overcoming the permanent ice cap.Besides,exploration of the Arctic route became meaningless as other trade routes such as those on the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean were opened and operated smoothly.In the middle and late periods of the Age of Discovery,European powers’activities in Arctic areas were mainly conducted for the purpose of enlarging existing colonies and seizing new ones.The Arctic Nations in the modern sense,Canada,the U.S.,Russia and Nordic countries,were established and finally determined their national boundaries during this period(colonization and the seizure of colonies).During this period,those further-north areas became worthless amid the disillusionment of establishing trade footholds on the Arctic route.①That Russia sold Alaska cheaply is one example.Alaska was once a colony of Russia.For the purpose of supporting the US to oppose its European rivals,Russia sold Alaska at USD 7,200,000 in total in 1867.The US thus became a nation inside the Arctic Circle incidentally,and the US government was then teased by its own people for having bought a useless“large refrigerator”.Editing Team of Research on Arctic Affairs ed.,Research on Arctic Affairs,Beijing:Ocean Press,2010,p.315.

Although the Arctic was unprofitable at that time,it was nevertheless carved up by competing nations.The bloody process of colonization,a by-product of globalization,has deeply branded the Arctic in the post-colonial period with nothing but contention.All Arctic Nations participated in the two world wars.As a result of World War I,contention for colonies in the Arctic ended up with the signing of the Spitsbergen Treaty in 1920,and the decision made by the Permanent Court of International Justice in 1933 that Greenland was a part of Denmark.②Editing Team of Research on Arctic Affairs ed.,Research on Arctic Affairs,Beijing:Ocean Press,2010,p.314.

During World WarⅡ,the Arctic Nations were divided into two camps which fought against each other.The remote northern route was utilized by the Allied Forces for logistics,but was also harassed by German submarines.

Throughout the Cold War,the U.S.and Russia,ex-allies,went different ways,resulting in the confrontation of the two major camps of East and West on the world stage.Access to markets was rudely cut off by the political barrier between the opposed blocs,and the development of an integrated,truly global market was hindered.Before the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, there was no active economy in the Arctic region,but its strategic security value stood out due to its role in the two world wars.Furthermore,as the U.S.and the Soviet Union,the two chief players amongst the competing alliances, lay on the two sides of the narrow Bering Strait,the Arctic Ocean became the front line of the military confrontation between the East and the West;some regions became places for nuclear tests and nuclear waste dump sites,and in some other regions,NATO and Warsaw Pact submarines often cruised silently beneath the ice.For the Arctic,it marked a transition from a period of geographic rediscovery to a period of military rediscovery which would last for 80 years.During these two periods,the Arctic region witnessed only conquest,colonial rivalry,and confrontation of military alliances,without any ground or condition for general cooperation between the opposing alliances based on any common interest.

Meanwhile,another important historical and geopolitical factor emerged in the 1970s:rapid changes in the Arctic natural environment.Arctic scientists report that in the past several decades there have been extremely unusual changes in the Arctic climate and natural environment,which are called rapid changes.In the past 100 years(1906-2005),the temperature of the earth’s surface rose by 0.74℃,while the rise in the temperature of the Arctic region was twice that of the earth.One direct consequence of the temperature rise is the rapid melt of the Arctic permanent ice cap,comprising glaciers and frozen soil on Arctic lands and sea ice in the Arctic Ocean.According to the latest research,the area covered by sea ice in the Arctic Ocean in September of 2011 (summer)was reduced by 40%from that of 1979(the first year of recorded satellite observation);the area of sea ice in January of 2012(winter)was the fourth lowest since 1979.①Katherine Leitzell,Arctic ice extent low overall,high in the Bering Sea,at http://nsidc. org/arcticseaicenews/2012/02/arctic-ice-extent-low-overall-high-in-the-bering-sea/,20 December 2011.

The direct economic consequences of the shrinking and rapid melt of Arctic sea ice are:(1)The probable re-opening of the abandoned Arctic route that connects East Asia,Europe,and North America,will bring to our mind how the world political and economic patterns were changed by the opening of intercontinental routes(the Pacific route and the Atlantic route)in the past;(2)The exploitation,refining,and transportation of resources will develop rapidly.The development of the world demands the exploitation of the abundant resources in the Arctic,which will develop briskly despite the absence of favorable conditions for opening the route for transportation,and such development is easier toachieve with the possibility of opening the Arctic route;(3)Not only will new fisheries with high economic value come into being in the Arctic Ocean,but the traditional fisheries of the north Atlantic and north Pacific may move northward into the high latitude waters of the Arctic Ocean.

Against the backdrop of globalization,the rapid change in the Arctic’s natural environment is an impressive occurrence which has turned the Arctic from a“field of waste”to a“field of fortune”,thus ushering in a new period of economic rediscovery.However,there remain some significant problems.First, although the security pattern of the previous period as a legacy of the Cold War has changed from the confrontation between the U.S.and the Soviet Union to a confrontation between NATO and Russia,the adversarial and strategic conflict has not fundamentally changed.Second,according to the logic of the development of capitalism,economic utilization of the Arctic is based upon the ownership of Arctic resources,a fact which has made it natural to openly and intensely contend for territorial sovereignty over Arctic land and the Arctic O-cean.Third,the newly emerging nations outside the Arctic region are potential powers for the future rediscovery of the Arctic economy.The shift from military rediscovery to economic rediscovery of the Arctic is therefore full of both chances for economic development and challenges of political and security uncertainty.How to decrease such strategic risk so as to make full use of the opportunities for economic development is the main strategic focus of all nations involved in Arctic affairs today and in the days to come,as the world strategically prepares for the coming period of massive development and utilization of the Arctic.Thus the essence of complexity of the regional situation in the Arctic;any activity in the Arctic,competition or cooperation,is strategic.

Ⅱ.Subjects and Issues:Sustainable Development and Strategic Security

In the new period of economic rediscovery of the Arctic,the peaceful use of the Arctic may be confronted with two main challenges:sustainable development and strategic security.The former concerns preventing and reducing environmental degradation during economic development,while the latter is a question of how nations inside the Arctic region settle the residual problems left by the Cold War and the increasingly obvious sovereignty disputes,as well as security concerns caused by changes in the geopolitical relationships of large nations and the potentially strategic use of the Arctic.In fact,the challengesfaced by nations inside and outside the Arctic region have determined the subjects and priority issues of actual and potential international cooperation in the Arctic.Before the advent of massive utilization of the Arctic,the creation of a mechanism for cooperation itself becomes a matter of priority to confront the aforementioned challenges.

Cooperation specifically addressing the Arctic began after the end of the Cold War.Towards the end of the Cold War,the Soviet Union offered to tear down the Iron Curtain in the Arctic because of its need to improve economic development.Gorbachev made a speech on diplomatic policy in Murmansk, proposing six military and civil cooperative initiatives,including(1)a nuclearfree zone in Northern Europe,(2)restrictions on naval activities in the North, (3)peaceful cooperation in developing the Arctic’s natural resources,(4)collaboration in scientific research on polar matters,(5)joint efforts to ensure environmental protection in the region,and(6)opening the North Sea Route to international shipping.①E.C.H.Keskitalo,Negotiating the Arctic:The Construction of an International Region, 1sted.,New York:Routledge,2003,p.43.The comprehensive and often specific(the Arctic route)subjects and issues regarding cooperation proposed by Gorbachev cover four main fields:strategic security,sustainable development,environmental protection,and scientific research,which,we might say,almost precisely establish the main fields and orientation of future cooperation in the Arctic.While the actual development of cooperation in the Arctic has not gone beyond such fields since Gorbachev’s outlining of Arctic policy,the priority areas have changed from scientific research and environmental protection to the dual developmental subjects of sustainable development and strategic security.

After Gorbachev’s Murmansk speech,Finland was the first to respond, proposing to take joint actions to implement the strategic initiative of protecting the Arctic environment.②E.C.H.Keskitalo,Negotiating the Arctic:The Construction of an International Region, 1st ed.,New York:Routledge,2003,p.44.In 1991,eight Arctic nations held the first ministerial conference in Rovaniemi,Finland,where the Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment was announced③Polar Strategy Research Division of Polar Research Institute of China ed.,A Collection of Declarations and Rules of Procedure of the Arctic Council,2010,p.2.and four strategic plans were proposed,including Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program(AMAP), Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment(PAME),Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna(CAFF),and Emergency,Prevention,Preparedness and Re-sponse(EPPR).The main measure of the declaration“requires broad international cooperation”,and“cooperation in scientific research to specify sources, indigenous peoples and to invite their organizations to future pathways,sinks and effects of pollution”.Scientific research was listed as one of the cooperative subjects because of the necessity of acquiring detailed information on the Arctic environment and exchanging data between nations.The vast area,severe environment,and shortage of research devices and technology in the Arctic have made international cooperation on scientific research an“eternal”subject. In fact,scientific research lays the foundation for the strategic plans for all subsequent subjects.International cooperation on scientific research has always been the primary platform for Arctic cooperation;it has turned gradually from serving environmental protection to serving sustainable development(to cope with the climate change and development and utilization),and the turning point was the period of 2007-2008,the International Polar Year(IPY).

Following the Rovaniemi Meeting,in 1992 the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development was held in Rio de Janeiro,Brazil,where the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development was announced to meet new changes in the world,of which environment and development had become the coordinating themes.In the 1993 ministerial conference of the Arctic Nations held in Nuuk,Greenland,it was indicated that“[n]oting that in order to achieve sustainable development,environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of the development process and cannot be considered in isolation from it.”①Polar Strategy Research Division of Polar Research Institute of China ed.,A Collection of Declarations and Rules of Procedure of the Arctic Council,2010,p.5.Before the conference,besides the planned four groups,a special working group on sustainable development and utilization was established. Since then,based on the mechanism and platform of the ministerial conferences of the Arctic Nations,environmental protection and sustainable development have been the main issues for international cooperation on the Arctic,which includes coping with climate change.

The many subjects of Arctic cooperation are developing from low politics to high politics.Cooperation on strategic security is mainly a product of the Cold War’s enduring legacy(i.e.Russia vs.NATO).Although Gorbachev highlighted this fact in his Murmansk speech,and as a response the US army retreated from its military base in Iceland,subsequent development has constantly been avoided or shelved.On the forum for multilateral cooperation,theDeclaration on Establishment of the Arctic Council in 1996 made it clear that the Arctic Council should avoid matters related to military security.In fact,cooperation on Arctic strategic security is carried out in other ways,primarily the negotiation on nuclear disarmament between Russia and the U.S.,and joint military exercises on search and rescue and anti-terrorism(after“9/11”). However,with the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice,it is now possible to develop and utilize resources in northern Russia and the northern sea route,whose strategic security value will rise substantially with the increase of economic expectations.Meanwhile,the territorial dispute on Arctic lands is intensifying,and Russia is increasingly vigilant towards NATO.Cooperation on strategic security has become a theme that always seeks settlement,but the possibility of settlement is dwindling.To add to the complexity,China,India,and Brazil have developed as new powers,the Middle East has drawn the attention of NATO, and the Pacific Ocean has drawn the attention of the U.S.,thus reducing the perceived urgency of Arctic cooperation on strategic security.However,it remains a potential landmine of mass destruction,which if not carefully removed,would subject environmental protection and sustainable development to the whims of fear.

Ⅲ.Regional and Global:Two Approaches for Cooperation on Arctic Affairs

Multilateral cooperation on Arctic affairs is proceeding on two different paths.One is the cooperation of small groups led by the nations inside the Arctic,and the other is the cooperation of large groups including nations inside and outside the Arctic or led by the United Nations.With the increasing expectations on the utilization of the Arctic,the interests of the players in different geopolitical relationships have become divided,and the difference between these two approaches has become obvious.However,due to the geopolitical circumstances of the Arctic and its status within international laws of the sea, the two approaches cannot substitute each other.

The cooperation of small groups began in 1987,towards the end of the Cold War,but the intended approach was not clear at that time.In that year, Gorbachev made a speech on diplomatic policy in Murmansk,proposing six military and civil cooperative initiatives(see above).The nations inside the Arctic were the first to make positive responses to the proposal.Finland,the U.S.,and Canada followed up successively by discussing the specific coopera-tion subjects and the cooperative mechanism.In 1991,the eight Arctic Nations met in Finland,the proposer of the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, and announced the Rovaniemi Declaration,“[r]esolving to pursue together in other international environmental forum those issues affecting the Arctic environment which require broad international cooperation”.Although the approach of cooperation of the small group was not clear,the platform on which the eight countries discuss joint actions on the Arctic affairs slowly began taking shape.The limitation of participants led the platform to the approach of cooperation in small groups.In 1996,the Arctic Council was officially established,which increased the expectation of economic utilization,and the subject for cooperation developed from the single issue of“Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy”into the dual issues of“Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy”and“Sustainable Development”.It was determined that this platform would not discuss any military affairs,which meant that cooperation on strategic security would be achieved in other,often bilateral ways,such as Norway-Russia,Scandinavia-Russia,and U.S.-Russia military exercises on antiterrorism and maritime search and rescue,and through other channels like negotiation on nuclear disarmament between the U.S.and Russia.Organizations of smaller groups,such as Barents Euro-Arctic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers,were established and became active in the Atlantic sector of the Arctic Ocean to promote common policy and action based on the interests of the small groups.Such mechanisms produced their first achievement in the 2011 Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic.

The development of cooperation within the Arctic Council has not been smooth,and the cooperation issues have not expanded since the determination of the dual subjects in 1996.The planting of a Russian flag at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean in August 2007 heated up the dispute on sovereignty.Instead of putting the issue on the agenda of the Council,the Arctic coastal States comprising the Arctic Nations established a five-state cooperation mechanism,one of the famous achievements of which was peaceful settlement of the Barents Sea delimitation dispute between Russia and Norway,which had lasted for forty years.

By reviewing the development of cooperation on small groups,we may come to the conclusion that their cooperation is always on subjects and issues related to sustainable development,and that when any strategic security issue is involved,small-group cooperation is often avoided or superseded by smaller-group and bilateral cooperation.The existence and development of small groups depends wholly on the degree to which the interests of a single member and that of the group overlap.The expansion of subjects or the introduction of new members may reduce their overlapping interests;thus,the cooperation may come to a halt and the mechanism may cease to be effective.This also means that the cooperation of smaller groups on fewer subjects and bilateral cooperation may become more prevalent,and prove more fruitful,in the future.

The cooperation of large groups can be dated to the conclusion of the Spitsbergen Treaty in 1920,before which several countries claimed sovereignty over Spitsbergen.As World War I concluded,eighteen countries including Norway,the U.S.,Denmark,France,and Japan signed the Treaty in Paris in order to resolve the conflict.①China acceded to the treaty on July 1,1925.The Treaty recognizes the full and absolute sovereignty of Norway over Spitsbergen,including Bear Island,and ships and nationals of all contracting parties should enjoy equally the rights of fishing,hunting,and mining in the territories and in their territorial waters,subject to the observance of local laws and regulations.②Editing Team of Research on Arctic Affairs ed.,Research on Arctic Affairs,Beijing:Ocean Press 2010,pp.314～315.As far as the range of locations of the contracting parties is concerned,the resolution of even such an important Arctic affair as territorial claims was mainly subject to the situation and need of the whole world or the regions south of the Arctic,because the concept of the Arctic as a region was only geographic,while the Arctic nations have their political and economic centers in the south.Under the prevailing circumstances,the Arctic did not have strategic value and was in a subordinate position politically and economically;the cooperation on Arctic affairs,therefore, inevitably started in the global large-group approach.As the fight for colonies in the Arctic came to an end,the fantasy of an Arctic intercontinental route again evaporated,and the focus of contention among nations shifted towards the warmer south,all activity in the Arctic became frozen still except for occasional military exercises.Furthermore,due to the iron curtain erected during in the Cold War,international cooperation in Arctic affairs was suspended.However, the United Nations,established after the Second World War,provided a mechanism and platform for the settlement of global affairs(including peaceful settlement of disputes,the utilization of seas,environmental protection,and sustainable development).Although cooperation in Arctic affairs in this mannerdid not specifically aim at the Arctic per se,some international treaties or rules do specially treat the Arctic region,such as the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity,and the 2002 IMO Guidelines for Ships Operating in Arctic Ice-covered Waters (non-mandatory).These treaties and rules,proposed by the United Nations and other organizations,cover the Arctic effectively because of the existence of“global commons”in the Arctic,which is the legal basis of cooperation on Arctic affairs from this large-group approach.

With the coming period of economic rediscovery in the Arctic,the divergence between these two approaches of cooperation appears to be increasingly obvious.Are the Arctic affairs regional or global?If they are regional or mostly regional,the approach of small-group cooperation is proper;if global,largegroup cooperation is more suitable.Regardless of the concerns on policies, such divergence mainly stems from confusion on the concept of the Arctic region.If the Arctic means the lands and territorial waters on which sovereignty has been determined,Arctic affairs are regional.If the Arctic only means the Arctic Ocean,then Arctic affairs are truly global,just like the affairs of other oceans.In fact,the Arctic usually represents the land with determined sovereignty,the coastal areas in which there is a sovereignty dispute,and even the Arctic Ocean as high seas and the seabed“area”.Moreover,the issues of changes on climate and ecosystems have surpassed regional scope and overflowed into the global realm.Objectively,Arctic affairs are both regional and global.①“The issues relating to the Arctic are mostly regional ones,but some of them are trans-regional such as climate change and marine shipping.Therefore,we need strengthened cooperation at both regional and international levels.”See the speech made by Tang Guoqiang of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in the 2010 Arctic Frontiers Meeting.For the subjects of sustainable development and strategic security of the Arctic,both small group and large-group approaches are reasonable and proper. Indeed,isolating them would put us into a dilemma.

The Arctic Nations deny the possibility of concluding an Arctic Treaty by mimicking the Antarctic Treaty,and at the same time emphasize observation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.They cooperated within the small-group approach on the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue,but with regard to Arctic shipping rules,they cooperated using the large-group approach(compared to the utilization of other oceans,Arctic shipping is relatively small,and to overemphasize its regional na-ture may be detrimental to the shipping interests of other areas).

Nations outside the Arctic tend to cope with Arctic affairs with the largegroup approach,especially with regard to the Arctic Ocean.By cooperating in this way,they hope to expand the cooperative fields to issues other than scientific research.The European Union has introduced some regional European laws and regulations governing Arctic affairs,such as the Act on Banning the Imports of Seal Products and Bill of Rights.

If new Arctic rules and systems can be established through long-term multilateral cooperation,the early fruits for the period of economic rediscovery of the Arctic may be borne through bilateral cooperation.Such positive results will play an important role in the formulation of Arctic regulations.Active bilateral cooperation,if targeting the establishment of Arctic regulations,would correct or strengthen the orientation of multilateral cooperation.It is a basic fact for current Arctic cooperation that while the obvious multilateral cooperation is developing rapidly along two approaches,the more frequent bilateral cooperation addressing Arctic affairs of nations inside and outside the region in practice plays a significant,if understated,role.As previously mentioned,Russia and Norway,by negotiation,settled their demarcation dispute on the Barents Sea which had lasted forty years,and demonstrated a positive result of the Ilulissat Declaration.①On May 28,2008,Russia,Norway,Canada,the U.S.and Denmark,among whom there had been sovereignty dispute on the Arctic Ocean,declared in Ilulissat of Greenland that they had reached a consensus that the international law of sea should be the principles for the settlement of maritime disputes.This success has additionally strengthened the multilateral cooperation of small groups of the Arctic coastal countries.An example of unsuccessful bilateral cooperation is that of the dispute between the E.U.and Canada concerning the E.U.’s banning of seal product imports.Canada objected to accepting the E.U.as a permanent observer of the Arctic Council,thereby frustrating the Council’s efforts to broaden the scope of participators and raising the access threshold,while further weakening the openness of the smallgroup approach,which was inherently frail.

The basis for cooperation is the consensus of all participants on how to increase benefits.It is easier to reach consensus in bilateral cooperation as there are fewer participants,and interests and demands are unitary.However,due to the diversity of statuses and interests of all participants,misunderstanding may occur on the interests of Arctic cooperation.The risk mainly depends on the o-rientation of the current political relationship of participants and the establishment of bilateral cooperation based on such orientation.For example,the bilateral cooperation of the Arctic Nations is based on the current Arctic multilateral cooperation platforms and mechanisms;while for the cooperation between countries inside and outside the Arctic and among countries outside the Arctic, besides the large-group approach,a more productive approach is based on the current bilateral cooperative framework(such as strategic cooperation relationships and alliances).

To sum up,for the purpose of establishing general rules,there are two approaches of cooperation:the small-group regional approach,and the large-group global approach.For the purpose of strengthening practical benefits,bilateral cooperation must remain frequent and active.One effective approach to avoid risks in bilateral cooperation is to make full use of the current multilateral or bilateral cooperative mechanisms and platforms.

Ⅳ.Laws and Rules:The Creation of New Order in Arctic Cooperation

In the new century,globalization led by capitalism is developing in depth and breadth.The competition between nations has turned from territory to market,and now to rules.The Arctic is currently in the stage of strategic preparation for entry into the global market,so the competition for leadership in making rules and schemes has become the main focus and policy orientation in the region.All countries ultimately attempt to be the leading player in making new rules for Arctic development and utilization that are beneficial to themselves,whether by cooperating in small or large groups.

The current Arctic order was established in the period of military rediscovery,when the centers of international political and economic activities,albeit in the Northern Hemisphere,varied only in the North Temperate Zone,and the cold Arctic region was not so closely connected with the rest of the world.Before 1991,the end of the Cold War,treaties and regulations related to the Arctic primarily concerned security and sovereignty.After 1991,regulation turned its attention toward environmental protection and sustainable development(see table below).

A Table for Arctic or Arctic-related Treaties and Regulations1)

Renewal table 1

Renewal table 2

The current Arctic regulations binding on the Arctic Nations are mainly the result of global international laws and treaties outside the Arctic,and regional regulations specifically addressing the Arctic are rare.The only case of such regulation which is binding on the Arctic Nations is the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue,approved onlylast year.The main problems for the current Arctic scheme of laws and regulations have been observed by Emily Hildreth:“A.A complete lack of binding international regulation of oil and gas extraction activities,with the exception of the areas covered by OSPAR and the International Seabed Authority;B.The Arctic’s high vulnerability to the problems associated with all‘Areas Beyond National jurisdiction’(ABNJs);C.A failure to create special and consistent regulations for ships’activities within the region of the harsh,fragile,and isolated conditions of the Arctic marine environment;D.The serious problems associated with a‘flag-State-only’enforcement mechanism;E.A lack of ecosystem-based management mechanisms across different States,Marine Protected Areas(MPAs),and Environmental Impact Assessments(EIAs)for Arctic activities.”①Emily Hildreth,Holes in the Ice:Why a Comprehensive Treaty Will Not Succeed in the Arctic and How to Implement an Alternative Approach,The Yearbook of Polar Law, Vol.3,2011,pp.556～557.The above observation only covers environmental protection,without even touching upon numerous problems in other fields,such as strategic security and fishing.

In fact,a primary reason for the difficulty in concluding regional regulations that are generally binding and specifically address the Arctic is the imbalance of regional development in the Arctic combined with the diversity of the participants.For example,the utilization of the Northwest Passage and the Northeast Passage are on different levels,which may lead to the divergence of Russia and Canada on technology issues of IMO guidelines for ships operating in the Arctic.The diversity of the participants has been fully illustrated by the fact that most Arctic-related treaties are concluded globally.

The utilization of the Arctic is involving different Arctic Nations and areas in different ways.All Arctic Nations are excited at the agreement of the first mandatory treaty.However,to achieve good governance of the Arctic and to establish a new order of peaceful use and sustainable development,cooperation on Arctic affairs at the global level has proven most effective from a historical and long-term perspective,and should be continued.

(Editor:WANG Fan; English Editors:CHEN Xiaoshuang;William Price)

*ZHANG Xia,Researcher,and Director of Polar Strategic Studies Division of Polar Research Institute of China.E-mail:zhangxia@pric.gov.cn.The paper is sponsored by Research on Geopolitics of Polar Regions,a sub-project of the Special Project on Comprehensive Investigation and Evaluation of Antarctic and Arctic Environment(2011-2015)and by the joint-group project of International Cooperation Department,SOA and PRIC(2008-).

**TU Jingfang,Research Associate,Polar Strategic Studies Division of Polar Research Institute of China.