Governing the Arctic: From Cold War Theater to Mosaic of Cooperation

Abstract

During the years since the waning of the Cold War, the Arctic has experienced a dramatic shift from the status of sensitive theater of operations for the deployment of strategic weapons systems to that of focal point for a range of initiatives involving transnational cooperation. These initiatives take a variety of forms. Some, like the establishment of the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (1991) and the creation of the Arctic Council (1996), involve straightforward intergovernmental agreements. Others, such as the construction of the Northern Forum (1991), feature leagues of subnational actors drawn together in pursuit of common interests that differ from those of national governments. Still others, like the founding of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (1977), the development of the International Arctic Science Committee (1990), and the launching of the University of the Arctic (2001), take the form of nongovernmental arrangements designed to address specific Arctic issues and to convey a sense of the significance of these concerns to the world at large. How can we account for this flurry of regional initiatives in a world increasingly dominated by global processes? What does the future hold for transnational cooperation in the circumpolar Arctic, and does the experience of this region hold lessons for those interested in regionalism more generally? In answering these questions, this brief account seeks to (1) show how the mosaic of cooperative arrangements emerging in the Arctic differs from what mainstream accounts characterize as international regimes and (2) demonstrate the importance of regional responses to global issues. The Arctic differs fundamentally from more familiar regions like Western Europe, the Middle East, or Southeast Asia. Iceland alone lies wholly within the region. Otherwise, the Arctic is a region of peripheries in the sense that it comprises more or less remote portions of seven countries: Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States. Although the area generally included within the boundaries of the Arctic is vast, covering some 40 million square kilometers, or 8 percent of the earth's surface, the human population of the region includes only about 4 million people. (1) Because the region is large and relatively remote, matters of policy relating to the Arctic have traditionally involved interactions between northern peripheries and the metropoles of states located far to the south. On the one hand, the pattern of interaction underlying this north/south axis looms as a barrier to be overcome for those seeking to foster a distinct identity for the Arctic as an international region. On the other hand, the shared experiences that accompany peripheral status constitute one of the starting points for cooperation among those concerned with issues of importance to the Arctic and its peoples. The overall picture of transnational cooperation in the Arctic is complex; it features a mosaic of issue-specific arrangements rather than a single comprehensive and integrated regime covering an array of issues that constitute the region's policy agenda. Even the most formal of these arrangements (for example, the Arctic Council) are based on ministerial declarations rather than on conventions or treaties, so that their legal status is relatively weak. (2) For the most part, the organizational components of these Arctic arrangements are sharply limited as well. The Arctic Council, for instance, has no secretariat of its own; the Northern Forum has a small secretariat that lacks the capacity to operate as an actor in its own right. Some commentators have pointed to these features of the institutional complex that has evolved in the Arctic as signs of weakness. Starting from the premise that a comprehensive and legally binding regime with significant organizational capacity of its own is superior to the sort of piecemeal system in evidence in the Arctic, they are impressed more by the deficiencies of the Arctic mosaic than by the exuberant proliferation of innovative arrangements in the region during the last fifteen years. …