Topic: Militarization of the Arctic
I.
OVERVIEW OF THE ISSUE
The legal status of the Arctic region has been disputed for several decades. According to international law
the Arctic is not controlled by any single country, but all Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Norway,
Russia, and the United States of America) continue to claim that parts of the Arctic are located in their
national waters. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea states that any waters beyond a
country’s 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone are considered to be the high seas also known as
international waters. However, continental shelves that extend out from a country past their exclusive
economic zone are open for that country to harvest minerals from the subsoil of their continental shelf.
There are many potential economic and territorial gains for countries that possess parts of the Arctic.
According to the USGS (United States Geological Survey), 22% of the world’s oil and natural gas is
located in the Arctic region. There are also large deposits of minerals and a wide variety of animal species
located in the Arctic. Polar ice caps are melting which will eventually open up new sea-lanes through the
Arctic, which could be used for trade. As a result of the many benefits of controlling the Arctic, countries
have began to use their military presences to gain illegitimate control of the region. These military
activities threaten the livelihood of indigenous people inhabiting the Arctic. The increased military
activities in Arctic and the struggle for resources could destabilize the region and cause permanent
damage to relations between the Arctic states.
II.
POSITION OF LATVIA
Latvia believes that the Arctic should be economically beneficial to all Arctic states. However, the chance
of potential ecological disasters does increase by removing resources from the Arctic. To help decrease
the chance of ecological disaster, Latvia agrees that the EU (European Union) should be the governing
body over the Arctic region. Countries that choose to remove resources from the subsoil of the Arctic
should be responsible for any damages done the Arctic environment. Latvia would also benefit
economically if the arctic became a free trade zone where any country was allowed to ship products
through the arctic. Another potential concern is the use of the Arctic as a staging ground for military
activities against sovereign nations. To counter this problem, Latvia believes that the Arctic should be a
demilitarized zone other than small warships patrolling the region for illegal activities. International group
such as NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and the CTSO (Collective Security Treaty
Organization) would be responsible for patrolling the region so no one Arctic state could intimidate the
others. Latvia also feels that if Arctic states continue to escalate their aggressive military activities in the
Arctic and accident could occur, which would then cause a military conflict. For these reasons, Latvia
advocated for peace in the Arctic region.
III.
PROPOSALS
Latvia proposes the creation of 2 new zones in the Arctic region that would replace the current rules on
continental shelves. The first zone would be the Arctic economic zone, which would add, 20 nautical
miles to countries current exclusive economic zone and allow the country to peruse any economic
activities they desire. The second zone would be a free trade zone, which would allow for any nation, that
is part of the UN (United Nations) to use the Arctic as a sea-lane for trading with other countries. The last
proposal by Latvia is that the Arctic becomes a demilitarized zone that is only patrolled by international
groups such as NATO and the CTSO.