Comparative Analysis of Arctic International Legal Policies of Canada and the United States
Abstract
International legal positions of States on current issues of international agenda can be regarded as an outcome of international legal policies of these States at the moment. Existing divergencies are not accounted only for a present issues, since such positions are indicative of the character of their consistent international legal policies. Based on this assumption, the research paper reviews different positions of the United States and Canada on some Arctic issues from the perspective of a fundamental difference between the arctic international legal policies of the two States. Since the establishment of Canada’s governance over Northwest territories Canada considered their exploration strategically important, whereas United States took their northern possessions for normatively granted. The active arctic policy of Canada resulted in the sector theory, which got subsequently enshrined in law and met international acquiescence in 1925. All the while till 1960-s the United States took up positions on arctic matters in response to Canada’s steps. Once the United States arrived at their concrete economic interests in the region, the American international legal policy opted for challenging Canada’s positions, which follow from the international legal policy heretofore undoubted. With the use of the comparative method, historical, legalistic and system approaches the research paper provides analysis of the legal solutions of the States for promoting their positions on three exemplary issues, such as maritime boundary delimitation in the Beaufort Sea, legal status of the Northwest Passage and applicability of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea in the Arctic Ocean. The article explains how Canada manages to lead consistent international legal policy; demonstrates what mistakes a State might make without firm course of the international legal policy being guided by short-term interests. All considered the research paper concludes on the significance of State’s commitment to its assumed positions for solving new questions.References
Baker J., Byers M. (2012) Crossed lines: the curious case of the Beaufort Sea maritime boundary dispute. Ocean Development & International Law, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 70-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2012.647509
Berkman P., Vylegzhanin A., Young O. (eds.) (2019) Baseline of the Russian Arctic laws. Berlin: Springer, 734 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-06262-0
Bilder R. (1970) The Canadian Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act: new stresses on the law of the sea. Michigan Law Review, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 1-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1287449
Bunik I.V. (2018) US-Canada Beaufort Sea maritime boundary dispute in the perspective of international law. Moskovskiy zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava= Moscow Journal of International Law, no 2, pp. 126-137 (in Russ.) DOI: https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2018-2-126-137
Byers M., Lalonde S. (2009) Who Controls the Northwest Passage? Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, vol. 42, pp. 1170-1210.
Caminos H., Molitor M. (1985) Progressive Development of International Law and the Package Deal. American Journal of International Law, vol. 79, no. 4, pp. 871-890. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2201830
Cavell J. (2011) ‘A little more latitude': explorers, politicians, and Canadian Arctic policy during the Laurier era. Polar Record, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 289-309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247410000537
Cavell J. (2017) Canada's Arctic sector claim in historical perspective: a response to Allan MacEachen. Polar Record, vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 186-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247416000760
Cavell J. (2019) The sector theory and the Canadian Arctic, 1897-1970. The International History Review, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 1168-1193. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07075332.2018.1475404
Danilov S.Yu. (2012) The evolution of Canadian federalism. Moscow: Higher School of Economics Publishing House, 349 p. (in Russ.)
De Lacharrière G. (1983) Politique juridique extérieure. Paris: Economica, 236 p.
Doroshenko I. (2020) The Arctic five: search for a balance of power in the region. Post-Soviet Issues, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 276-287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24975/2313-8920-2020-7-3-276-287
Head I. (1963) Sovereignty in the Arctic regions. McGill Law Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 200-226.
Horensma P. (1991) The Soviet Arctic. L.: Routledge, 256 p.
Hurd I. (1999) Legitimacy and Authority in International Politics. International Organization, vol. 53, pp. 379-408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/002081899550913
Kolb R. (2015) Réflexions sur les politiques juridiques extérieures. Paris: Pedone, 138 p. (in French)
Krisch N. (2005) International Law in Times of Hegemony: Unequal Power and the Shaping of the International Legal Order. European Journal of International Law, vol. 16, pp. 369-408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chi123
Lackenbauer P., Kikkert P. (2014) Legal appraisals of Canada's Arctic Sovereignty: key documents 1905-1956. In: Documents on Canadian Arctic Sovereignty and Security, no. 2, 388 p.
Miller D. (1925) Political rights in the Arctic. Foreign Affairs, no. 1, pp. 47-60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/20028421
Mimeault M. (1998) A Dundee ship in Canada's Arctic: SS Diana and William Wakeham's expedition of 1897. The Northern Mariner, vol. VIII, no. 3, pp. 51-61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25071/2561-5467.658
Nordquist M. et al. (eds.) (1993) The UN Convention on the law of the sea, 1982: a commentary. Vol. 2. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1088 p.
Nilsson A. (2018) The United States and the making of an Arctic nation. Polar Record, vol. 54, no. 275, pp. 95-107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0032247418000219
Petrov A.Yu. (2017) Alaska's cessation: discussion issues of the Russian-American transaction of 150 years ago. Noviy istoricheskiy vestnik=New Historical Herald, vol. 2, no. 52, pp. 103-120 (in Russ.)
Pharand D. (1983) Canada's Arctic jurisdiction in international law. Dalhousie Law Journal, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 315-342.
Roach J., Smith R. (2012) Excessive maritime claims. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 925 p DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004217720
Smith G. (1961) The transfer of Arctic territories from Great Britain to Canada in 1880, and some related matters, as seen in official correspondence. Arctic, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 53-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic3660
Smith G. (2016) The Historical and Legal Background of Canada's Arctic Claims. Ottawa: Centre on Foreign Policy and Federalism, 323 p.
Stephansson V. (1948) The Friendly Arctic. Moscow: Geografgiz, 514 p. (in Russ.)
Virally M. (1989) Réflexions sur la politique juridique des Etats. In: Guy Ladreit de Lacharrière et la politique juridique extérieure de la France. Paris: Masson, pp. 394402 (in French)
Vylegzhanin A.N. (2013) Legal status of the Arctic region in documents. In: Arctic Region: issues of international cooperation. Anthology. Vol. 3. Moscow: Aspect Press, pp. 11-44 (in Russ.)
Vylegzhanin A.N., Dudykina I.P. (2017) UN Convention of Law of Seas and legal regime of the Arctic shelf. Vestnik Voronezhskogo Universiteta=Herald of Voronezh University, no. 28, pp. 284-302 (in Russ.)
Vylegzhanin A.N., Molodtsov Ye.S., Dudykina I.P. (2015) Foreign research in law applicable to delineation and delimitation of the Arctic shelf. Moskovskij zhurnal mezhdunarodnogo prava=Moscow Journal of International Law, no. 3, pp. 5-23 (in Russ.)
Waultrin R. (1908) La question de la souveraineté des terres arctiques. Revue générale de droit international public, vol. XV, pp. 412-413 (in French)
Zinchenko A. (2004) Emerging issues in the work of the Commission on the limits of continental shelf. In: Legal and scientific aspects of continental shelf limits. Nordquist M. et al. (eds.). Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 223-250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789047413530_018
Žuravleva I.P. (2019) International law doctrines on the current status of the Arctic. Beograd: Školski servis Gajić, 434 p.
Copyright (c) 2023 Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
