PRE-VIEWING:

1. Why has the Arctic Region been at the top of the political agenda?
2. What does Russia get from the Arctic? How many sea routes that connect the East with the West can you name?

WHILE-VIEWING:

While watching, pay attention to the following words and expressions in context. Use them in your answers to the questions below and discussion.

• to have territorial claims
• to be part of the Arctic Council
• to address issues related to the Arctic Region
• the Arctic Circle
• to have jurisdiction to exploit the natural resources
• to extract minerals and large oil reserves
• to exude dominance and extend influence
• to include deposits of
• to depend on the Nordic countries for resources
• to allow goods, etc. to move free
• to be the main supplier of
• to export its crude oil to
• a strong dependence on Russian oil and gas
• a golden opportunity for
• to view Russia as a hostile actor
• to be covered with ice
• uninterrupted maritime highway (ice-breakers, etc.)
• to heavily invest in scientific research on off shore geology
• to be part of the ambitious Belt and Route initiative
• the most efficient and cost-effective
• to defy/ challenge plans
• to occupy an unusual position in the world politics

AFTER-VIEWING:

1. What makes Russia extend its dominance in the Arctic region? What does Russia’s huge Arctic plan consist in?
2. Do any other countries benefit from the Arctic region?
3. How does the video explain and illustrate the current geopolitical situation?
4. Why is the Northern Sea Route more convenient especially for Russia? How does the video evaluate the measures Russia has been taking in the Arctic Region?
5. What is China’s status in the Arctic Council? To what extent is it interested in maintaining good relations with Russia?
6. What countries are interested in Russia’s losing influence in the Arctic Region?
7. Which of the four routes is the most convenient for Europe? China?
8. Does the video present an objective stance on the issue?

THE ARCTIC REGION

HIGHLIGHTS

• read the passage
• focus on key terms
• summarise the information
• elaborate on:

• The Importance of the Arctic Region
• The Transformation of the Artic into a Regional Community
• The Role of the Arctic Council
• The Impact of Climate Change on the Arctic
• The Arctic States’ Response to Climate Change

KEY TERMS 

proclaim	to declare in an official public manner
pressing issue	urgently important, critical matter
transcendence	the quality or state of going beyond the ordinary limits
salience	importance
discord	disagreement, difference of opinion
surrender	to give (oneself ) up to some influence, course
substantiate	to show or establish (a claim, opinion, etc.) by proof or strong evidence
contested	argued over or questioned
elevate	to raise to a higher place or position, to a higher state or rank; promote
relevance	connected with the matter at hand; pertinent

With the warming of the Arctic, so did regional relations. Russian foreign minister Sergej Lavrov, while on a visit to Kirkenes in 2008, put it in a nutshell when he proclaimed that “the further North you go, the better East-West relations” (Pettersen, 2010). The pressing issues resulting from climate change more and more pushes the circumpolar North into the state of a regional society in the sense that the current collaboration reveals a „move towards transcendence of national space, making use of a more rule-based pattern of relations‟ (Hettne and Söderbaum, 2000: 464). The year 2007 was a turning point in this regard: the Arctic ice cover reached a new record low compared to previous years and generated sudden public, political and academic salience of Arctic affairs. Additionally, the well-known assessment of Arctic oil and gas deposits by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS, 2008) opened only one year after the (rhetorical) rush for the Arctic‟s black gold. That was why the symbolic gesture of a Russian research expedition in August 2007 to plant a titanium flag into the Arctic seabed right beneath the geographical North Pole caused an outcry among Western politicians and the wider public. Yet, instead of discord and diplomatic tussle, the Arctic states have moved closer together and get engaged in region-wide regulatory arrangements and problem-solving initiatives beyond their quest for territorial and domestic sovereignty in times of rising economic stakes.

The Arctic Council, by contrast, is still generally considered a weak institution with „decision-shaping‟, but no „decision-making power‟ (Young, 2012: 401-402). And without a doubt, the organisation remains first and foremost a forum for mutual consultation between and scientific assessment for otherwise de jure sovereign states. This, however, does not imply that the Council is a de facto non-influential body in northern politics. Quite the contrary, the organisation is currently on the cusp of becoming an active and relevant regional player in its own right. Ordinarily, international organisations acquire distinct agency through authoritative rights that member states surrender to them. States, on the other hand, deem it purposive to delegate autonomy to international organisations to manage collective action (problems) and to do so more effectively and cost-efficiently (Bradley and Kelley, 2008). Sovereignty, however, is a sensitive good to the littoral states, which instead strive to substantiate their claims to sovereign jurisdiction and have so far not delegated any decision-making, legislative or regulatory authority to the AC.

The ongoing emphasis on national sovereignty, however, has in some instances prompted a strong civil society opposition. The Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC), by way of example, emphasises that the Inuit are „united as a single people‟ and claim their right to self-determination and a more active role for indigenous organisations as opposed to governments (Inuit Circumpolar Council, 2009). Their common sense of belonging and shared identity was demonstrated, for instance, during the RAIPON incident in late 2012. The Russian Ministry of Justice had in November 2012 closed down the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North because of non-compliant statutes with Russian legislation. This aroused vigorous opposition and solidarity around the circumpolar North and within the Arctic Council, to which RAIPON is a Permanent Participant. After thorough inspections, the organisation continued regular work in March 2013.

The eight Arctic states hold a dominant, yet contested role in the Arctic Council. A much less acknowledged position beyond its formal character, however, is that the Arctic Council possesses and executes informal power as a highly specialized agent and norm-creator. The Council’s mandate as stated further above is overall broad and leaves to the Council room for interpretation. Following a detailed differentiation by Bradley and Kelley (2008), there are at least three types of authority that the AC (potentially) has independent of its members. The most pervasive influence the organisation enforces is through research and advice offered by its six working groups (Bradley and Kelley, 2008: 15-16). These scientific assessments are all too frequent the basis for ministerial and Senior Arctic Officials’ (SAO) meetings.

In these reports, the working groups do not only monitor and record the state of the art of Arctic change, but often give concrete policy recommendations for Arctic states to adopt in public policies. Taking PAME as a reference, the working group has next to the 2009 Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) report released several follow-up progress reports in 2006, 2011 and most recently 2013, which include a number of advice of how to improve marine safety and environmental protection (see Arctic Council, 2013b). The working group has further issued specialised policy guidelines and „operational steps to follow when planning for Arctic Offshore oil and gas activities‟ (Arctic Council, 2009). With respect to this, studies on the effectiveness of the Arctic Council as a „cognitive forerunner‟ (Nilsson, 2012) and in fulfilling its raison d’être expose that the organisation is (at least in the perception of individuals participating in AC working groups) an influential actor as regards, among others, enhancing international cooperation, coordination of Arctic public policies and elevating public awareness about the Arctic ecology (Kankaanpää and Young, 2012: 3-4; see also Stokke, 2007).

The second authority of the Arctic Council, even based on a formal mandate, is agenda-setting power (Bradley and Kelley, 2008: 14-15). To begin with, Arctic states’ delegations, the Senior Arctic Officials, serve as a „focal point‟ in the body and on behalf of their respective state (Arctic Council, 1998: 5). As the AC Rules of Procedure stipulate, they hold the right to interpret reports from working groups, pre-select and frame issues to be discussed in ministerial meetings as well as ultimately “review and make recommendations to the Arctic Council on proposals by Arctic States and Permanent Participants”. Also of growing importance is the newly established AC Secretariat, which officially started work in June 2013. It takes a central role in the Council by „making it less a forum and more an international organization‟ (Sellheim, 2012: 70). Its Terms of Reference provides the Secretariat with bureaucratic leverage “through the establishment of administrative capacity and by providing continuity, institutional memory, operational efficiency, enhanced communication and outreach, exchange of information with other relevant international organizations and to support activities of the Arctic Council” (Arctic Council, 2012: 1). International bureaucracies can use this authority to pursue their own objectives and to determine how these goals are reached best. Through their informational advantage and bureaucratic capacity to follow their own paths, even weakly mandated institutions like the AC Secretariat may create and recreate international norms and progressively promote a regional perspective (Barnett and Finnemore, 2004).

The Secretariat’s position in the Council structure is of strategic relevance as it, beyond purely administrative functions, also assists the rotating Council Chairmanship in writing meeting documents and final reports as well as communication and outreach plans “at the request of SAOs and Permanent Participants” (ibid). Deepened interaction with indigenous organizations, working groups and observers may further put it in a gateway position for these actors to influence the wider agenda and day-to-day practices in Arctic regional governance. This, in turn, enhances the Secretariat’s bargaining power vis-à-vis the Arctic Eight. With this in mind, the Arctic can be seen as on the brink of becoming a regional community, that is a “process whereby the region increasingly turns into an active subject with a distinct identity, institutionalised or informal actor capability, legitimacy and structure of decision making in relation with a more or less responsive regional civil society” (Hettne and Söderbaum, 2000: 466).

Finally, it remains to be seen whether the legally-binding arrangements already adopted, i.e. the 2011 Maritime SAR and 2013 Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response agreement, provide the Council with authority for Arctic-wide monitoring and, while less likely, enforcement to ensure compliance (Bradley and Kelley, 2008: 12-14). While this is currently at odds with the littoral states’ claim for unrestricted national sovereignty and the Council’s main role as a venue for deliberation, it may prove to be both more effective and efficient for the eight Arctic states to grant the AC authority in this context. Even soft measures such as direct monitoring of state performances in the respective areas may put AC members under peer pressure and in consequence lead to policy adaptations or a „race for best practices‟

The EU’s Arctic Vision

KEY TERMS

MATCH THE TERM WITH ITS DEFINITION:

proclaim	importance
pressing issue	the quality or state of going beyond the ordinary limits
transcendence	to show or establish (a claim, opinion, etc.) by proof or strong evidence
salience	to raise to a higher place or position, to a higher state or rank; promote
discord	to declare in an official public manner
surrender	disagreement, difference of opinion
substantiate	urgently important, critical matter
contested	to give (oneself ) up to some influence, course
elevate	connected with the matter at hand; pertinent
relevance	argued over or questioned

RESTORE THE SENTENCE BY FILLING IN THE KEY TERM:

1. With the warming of the Arctic, so did regional relations. Russian foreign minister Sergej Lavrov, while on a visit to Kirkenes in 2008, put it in a nutshell when he ……………. that “the further North you go, the better East-West relations” (Pettersen, 2010).

2. Russian foreign minister Sergej Lavrov, while on a visit to Kirkenes in 2008, put it in a nutshell when he ……………that “the further North you go, the better East-West relations” (Pettersen, 2010).

3. The …………… resulting from climate change more and more pushes the circumpolar North into the state of a regional society in the sense that the current collaboration reveals a „move towards …………… of national space, making use of a more rule-based pattern of relations‟ (Hettne and Söderbaum, 2000: 464).

4. The year 2007 was a turning point in this regard: the Arctic ice cover reached a new record low compared to previous years and generated sudden public, political and academic ……………of Arctic affairs.

5. Instead of …………… and diplomatic tussle, the Arctic states have moved closer together and get engaged in region-wide regulatory arrangements and problem-solving initiatives beyond their quest for territorial and domestic sovereignty in times of rising economic stakes.

6. Ordinarily, international organisations acquire distinct agency through authoritative rights that member states …………… to them.

7. Sovereignty, however, is a sensitive good to the littoral states, which instead strive to …………… their claims to sovereign jurisdiction and have so far not delegated any decision-making, legislative or regulatory authority to the AC.

8. The eight Arctic states hold a dominant, yet …………… role in the Arctic Council.

9. With respect to this, studies on the effectiveness of the Arctic Council as a „cognitive forerunner‟ and in fulfilling its raison d’être expose that the organisation is an influential actor as regards, among others, enhancing international cooperation, coordination of Arctic public policies and …………… public awareness about the Arctic ecology.

10.The Secretariat’s position in the Council structure is of strategic …………… as it, beyond purely administrative functions, also assists the rotating Council Chairmanship in writing meeting documents and final reports as well as communication and outreach plans “at the request of SAOs and Permanent Participants”.

COMPLETE THE PASSAGE WITH THE WORDS FROM THE BOX:

1. disseminate
2. objectives
3. representing
4. internal 
5. contributions
6. facilitate
7. perspectives
8. awareness
9. sustainable
10. submit 

Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat

The Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat (IPS) provides support for the Permanent Participants, the groups 1) ……………. Arctic Indigenous Peoples in the Arctic Council.

What IPS does

• Facilitate the participation of Indigenous Peoples’ organizations in the work of the Arctic Council, assist and provide Secretariat support functions to the Permanent Participants primarily in Arctic Council activities, facilitate and assist the Permanent Participants to prepare and 2) ……………. proposals relevant to the work of the Arctic Council, facilitate the presentation of the 3) ……………. of Indigenous Peoples in the Council’s Working Groups and in meeting of Senior Arctic Officials and Ministers;

• Enhance the capacity of the Permanent Participants to pursue the 4) ……………. of the Arctic Council, assist the Permanent Participants develop their 5) ……………. capacity to participate and intervene in the Arctic Council, and assist the Permanent Participants in the furtherance of their activities in relation to participation and full consultation within the Arctic Council, and assist them in how to best make 6) ……………. to the Council’s work;

• 7) ……………. dialogue and communications among the Permanent Participants and among Permanent Participants and other Arctic Council and related bodies, provide opportunities for co-operative and co-ordinated activities among the Permanent Participants and IPS, facilitate meetings and communication between the Permanent Participants, and facilitate the translation of the communications between the Permanent Participants as far as possible;

• Support the Permanent Participants in carrying out actions to maintain and promote the 8) ……………. development of Indigenous Peoples cultures in the Arctic;

• Gather and 9) ……………. information on and provide and list sources of different forms of knowledge,

• And contribute to raising public 10) ……………. of Arctic Council issues through a regularly updated web site and regularly produced newsletters and other publications.

MIXED BAG

Brazil’s Arctic Council Dialogue Is a Game Changer

By Michael Mahanta

Brazil is taking a step towards making history. The country is 1) contemplating/ elaborating the possibility of being the first from the southern hemisphere to 2) access/ enter the Arctic. To do so, Brazil may sign the Svalbard Treaty and seek observer status with the Arctic Council. The Foreign Ministry in Brazil has decided to revive 3) x/ the 2010 debate, focusing on two particular issues. The first is whether Brazil should 4) accede/ acceed to the Svalbard Treaty, and the second is whether it should apply for observer status at the Arctic Council.

Why is Brazil eyeing the Arctic?

The Arctic is 5) conceived/ perceived as a faraway place for the average Brazilian. Brazil’s capital, Brasilia is almost about 7,000 miles away from the North Pole. 6) Thus, / However, Brazil has consistently 7) expressed/ emphasised interest in the Arctic region throughout the 21st century. Stein-Gunnar Bondevik, CEO of Innovation Norway in South America, confirms this to High North News.

“It is generally acknowledged that most big nations with a bit of self-respect look to the Arctic, and that the most keen ones have placed themselves firmly in the observer chairs of the Arctic Council.”

8) Although/ However, a common feature among them is that they belong in the northern hemisphere, he says, but emphasizes, “True, the process is in an early stage yet, however, it is nevertheless clear that the Brazilian MFA has initiated a process to consider the country’s role in the larger international Arctic cooperation.”

Now 9) x/ , although including Brazil as an observer in Arctic dialogue for such as the Arctic Council may seem a bit 10) superfluous/ abundant, however this can be a game changer for both Brazil and the West.