Abstract
Russian foreign policy in the increasingly important Arctic region reflects an ambiguous combination of assertiveness and cooperation in accordance with international law. Against this background, the existing literature on the Arctic tends to polarise around revisionist and status quo interpretations of Russian foreign policy in the region. The present paper contrasts the divergent interpretations through case studies of the Russian flag planting on the North Pole seabed in 2007 and Russia’s participation at the Ilulissat Summit in 2008 which can be seen as ‘crucial’ cases for the competing interpretations. Overall, the case studies provide support for a modidied version of the status quo interpretation which incorporates insights from the revisionist interpretation.
Highlights
The existing literature on Russian foreign policy in the Arctic is divided into two competing camps
Given the importance of the UNCLOS in an Arctic context, adherence to the UNCLOS constitutes an important indicator of whether Russia is best classified as a revisionist power challenging the provisions of the UNCLOS or a status quo power adhering to the existing legal framework
The present paper aims to test the competing interpretations through case studies of the Russian flag planting in 2007 and the Ilulissat Summit in 2008 which can be treated as ‘crucial cases’ given their centrality to the competing interpretations (Eckstein 1975: 113-123, Gerring 2007: 115-122)
Summary
The existing literature on Russian foreign policy in the Arctic is divided into two competing camps. The ‘Arctic Five’ cooperation is based on the UNCLOS and was formally launched at the Ilulissat Summit in May 2008 when the ‘Arctic Five’ signed the Ilulissat Declaration and committed themselves to an ‘orderly settlement of any possible overlapping claims’ based on the existing legal framework in the Arctic (Ilulissat Declaration 2008) For these reasons, a Russian observer has posited that Russia’s Arctic policy aims to maintain ‘the status quo in the Arctic waters which exists from the Soviet period’ until Russia achieves UN recognition of its claims (Golotiuk 2008: 3). Conducting the case studies, the paper primarily relies on official statements from the Russian government and news coverage of the selected cases
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
