Institutional Framework for Arctic Governance: Do We Need Reforms?

This part explores institutional issues concerning the Arctic Council and its place in the governance of the Arctic region. It shows that the Arctic Council today occupies a key place in the overall hierarchy of institutions related to the Arctic. Nevertheless, its activities are not without specific problems, among which the main one is the permanent expansion of the number of observers, primarily by those countries located far from the Arctic. It is shown how these processes lead, if not to erosion of cooperation between the Arctic countries, then at least to the internationalization of the Arctic problematic, which is not always in the interests of the countries whose coasts are directly washed by the waters of the Arctic Ocean. In particular, such a debatable issue as the potential granting of observer status to such a supranational structure as the European Union has been considered. The questions as to which decision-making model—consensus, qualified majority, or some other—is most appropriate for the Arctic Council’s activities have also been investigated. The pros and cons of transforming the Arctic Council as an international forum into a full-fledged international organization are analyzed. Considerable attention in the section is paid to the differences between the Arctic and Antarctic as two polar regions, but with entirely different governance systems and legal regimes. In light of Russia’s two-year chairmanship of the Arctic Council, practical proposals have been made concerning new areas of the Arctic Council's activity. In particular, it was proposed to give it the authority to discuss and further develop marine protected areas in the Arctic. All of the problematic issues that stand in the way of this proposal have been identified, particularly those of a legal nature. It shows how scientific research and cooperation are a unifying factor for interstate cooperation in the Arctic. Attempts to coordinate research outside the Arctic Council in a new international organization are judged premature. Finally, we consider the most controversial issue regarding the Arctic Council's activities—granting it the authority to discuss issues related to security, particularly its military aspects. It is shown to what extent this proposal meets or does not meet the interests of the Arctic states.