Abstract
This paper addresses the positioning of the Inuit with regard to the institution of sovereignty within the broader context of an Arctic region that is becoming increasingly territorialized. First, the paper considers the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) and its emphasis on the need to think past a strict Westphalian conception of bounded state sovereignty in favor of a circumpolar cooperation that recognizes the Inuit people as key actors within any regime of Arctic governance. Juxtaposed to the ICC, however, the paper goes on to analyze the Greenland self rule government, which, in positioning itself for the creation of a future independent “Inuit state”, takes a much more traditional approach to international relations, thus embracing a more territorial conception of sovereignty. A rift is hence uncovered in the way that Inuit identity and sovereignty are conceived by the ICC and the Greenlandic self rule government. The paper continues to consider the possible impact of an independent Greenland on the future of Inuit self-determination more generally.
Highlights
There is no doubt that the issue of sovereignty in the Arctic has become a topic of increased interest in the last few years as Northern states come to grips with the challenges and opportunities posed by a rapidly warming Arctic region
As a state-centric Westphalian model continues to assert, or reassert, itself in the Arctic, the Greenlandic Inuit are positioning themselves for a full independence that makes the most of this powerful, and arguably overriding political imaginary
It is possible that the process of establishing a Greenlandic state will, as a consequence, work to obstruct more counter-hegemonic Inuit strategies inspired by a non-Western, indigenous political ontology
Summary
There is no doubt that the issue of sovereignty in the Arctic has become a topic of increased interest in the last few years as Northern states come to grips with the challenges and opportunities posed by a rapidly warming Arctic region. This article considers, first, how the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) has responded by issuing a Declaration on Arctic Sovereignty, in which it questions the right of any state to claim privileged status in the Arctic without incorporating the interests and rights of the Inuit people. Despite neoliberal (Keohane 1984; Keohane & Nye 1977) and constructivist (Katzenstein 1996; Onuf 1989; Wendt 1992) attempts to question the reification of the state entity, downplay the assumed anarchic global context, and infuse values into state behavior, there is little doubt that actual statecraft still remains very much gripped by the key assumption that the world is governed by the dynamics of self interested sovereign states in competition with each other
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
