The EU in the Arctic

Abstract

On what grounds should we understand European Union's Arctic policy, and what type of influence can this system, which is less than a state but more than an international organization, have on developments in the region? The EU is composed of 27 member-states, most of which have peripheral relations with the Arctic. Only three member-states - Denmark, Finland and Sweden - have more or less direct stakes in the Arctic and are member-states of the Arctic Council as well. In addition, the EU has signed agreements such as the European economic agreement with two Arcticoriented states, Norway and Iceland.This article sheds light on what role the European Union seeks in Arctic affairs and how its ambitions overlap with and/or chaUenge the interests of the region's coastal states. EU-Norway relations serve as a case in point.1 First, the article discusses the reasons why the EU, which only a few years ago did not aspire to become an influential actor in the region, is now developing a cross-cutting Arctic policy. Second, it identifies key EU priorities, with a focus on Norwegian priorities, in order to identify common and diverging interests. Finally, the article discusses the prospects for the European Union to increase its influence on Arctic developments. The analysis aims to contribute to the understanding of whether the Arctic is in a process of opening up for new actors, or whether developments in the region are, and wul continue to be, dominated by stakeholders already part of an Arctic inner circle.EU Arctic policy should not be understood as the coordinated product of clear-cut rational calculations. One reason is the obvious fact that the EU consists of 27 member-states, with their various agendas, and three institutions that have developed institutional dynamics internaUy and among themselves. EU Arctic policy is in some respects incoherent and unclear due to the institutional setup and the power relations between institutions and the EU level and between the EU level and the member-states. The EU seeks to harmonize interests and in most cases does not enjoy decisive power over the member-states. Consequently, EU Arctic policy cannot be derived directly from the member-states' interests or be understood as the priorities of the agenda-setting, policy-driving European Commission, or of the parliament. In some respects it is the result of a bargaining process among various relevant stakeholders and in other respects the result of a coordinating process. Policy documents from the European Commission and parliament are often mistakenly taken for official EU policy whue they are in fact just expressions of these institutions' priorities at a given stage of the policymaking process, or even of those of a handful of people within these institutions.This article argues that EU Arctic policy is stul on the drawing board. The EU has since 2007 gone through a learning process on Arctic matters, in which its priorities have been more clearly defined, particularly in relation to coastal states. Important factors that motivate and affect policy are the engagement of a smaU number of particularly active stakeholders at the state, institutional, and individual levels; Arctic or international events; and EU policy in other issue areas with Arctic implications. Since 2007 EU Arctic policy has developed from addressing the security implications of climate change, to focusing on how the EU could gain legitimacy and influence by being a responsible actor, to a more recent approach of highlighting EU rights as weU as responsibuities in the region. It has become a major goal to be accepted as a legitimate and natural partner in Arctic affairs.There seems to be general agreement on the basic principles of Arctic affairs between Norway and the EU. It is more likely that possibly contested issues will emerge as a consequence of interaction at the issue-specific level, such as EU-Norway energy relations, or EU environmental regulations with relevance for the economic agreement and Arctic implications, than as the result of the development of an overarching EU policy for the region. …