Concordia International School Shanghai Model United Nations ◆ Seventh Annual Session
Forum:
The Arctic Council
Issue:
Addressing the future growth of merchant marine traffic through
formerly impassable Arctic sea lanes
Student Officer: Christine Qian
Position:
Chair
Introduction
Global warming has led to large amounts of Arctic Ice to disappear completely. This has opened
up the formerly impassible Arctic sea lanes – yet the issue of maritime travel through the area remains
contentious. Although the Arctic Ocean is largely classified as a body of international water, traffic may
grow too large to be governed by itself.
Definition of Key Terms
Maritime
Connected with the sea, especially in relation to seaborne trade or naval matters.
Arctic Ocean
Also known as the Arctic Sea, the Arctic Ocean is the smallest and shallowest of the 5 major
Oceans. It covers an area of approximately 14,056,000 km2. It is surrounded by Eurasia, North America,
and Greenland. It possesses several islands.
Territorial waters
A term which denotes an area of coastal water extending 12 nautical miles (22.2 km) from a
country’s land-to-sea boundary.
Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs)
EEZs extend from the edge of Territorial waters to up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the
baseline. An EEZ implies that the sovereign nation has full rights over any natural resources within the
area.
International waters
Research Report ◆ Page 1 of 4
Concordia International School Shanghai Model United Nations ◆ Seventh Annual Session
International waters do not belong to any state, and all states are free to travel through them. Any
international criminal may be pursued by any country in this zone.
History
UNCLOS III
UNCLOS III set the standards for modern day maritime law. Among other things, the current
maritime laws designate international waters to be the property of all states, and to be freely used.
However, if an influx of merchant ships pours into the sea lanes, there could be a potential issue of
organization and ownership.
Key Issues
Current international sea laws and how they affect this issue
International waters are traditionally outside of the jurisdiction of any state. If these waters are
overexploited to the point where usage of the sea lanes becomes rivalrous, then there needs to be
organization of the area. However, if any one nation gains control of the Arctic sea lanes, there would
undoubtedly be taxation and a slew of other problems.
Resource exploitation issues within the sea lanes
Although resource exploitation is not allowed in international waters, the desire to remains. Since
passage is allowed within international waters without restriction, the risk of illegal exploitation exists.
Combatting it would require organization, which leads to the risk of a single nation claiming the area.
Major Parties Involved and Their Views
Littoral states
These states all have part of their territory placed within the Arctic Circle, making them the largest
stakeholders in the Arctic sea lanes.
Russia
Russia possesses a vested interest in not only resource exploitation of the Arctic Ocean,
but also in the transportation of goods within Arctic sea lanes, as to bypass the need to transport
goods through other, taxed and controlled waters.
USA
Research Report ◆ Page 2 of 4
Concordia International School Shanghai Model United Nations ◆ Seventh Annual Session
The USA, an economic powerhouse, maintains a huge interest in resource exploitation in
the Arctic Ocean. Like Russia, they have an interest in passing resources through the Arctic to
avoid other sea lanes.
Non-littoral states
China
As the second-largest economy, China’s interest within the Arctic Ocean is primarily for
resource exploitation. However, as an economic ally of Russia, their interests reflect theirs.
Timeline of Relevant Resolutions, Treaties and Event
Date
Description of event
1973
UNCLOS III begins
1982
UNCLOS III closes with modern standards for the sea
The Northern Sea Route (NSR) also known as the Northeast Passage became
2007
ice free and opened to ships.
Evaluation of Previous Attempts to Resolve the Issue
The sea lanes did not exist in the past, which makes this issue new in the region. However,
previous sea lanes were established (either by digging canals or building infrastructure upon existing sea
channels). These channels became controlled by the nearest sovereign nation (eg. the Panama canal),
however, this is inapplicable to this situation because the Arctic sea lanes are a large distance away
from every littoral state, and not clearly under the jurisdiction of any of them. Previously, many attempts
to solve this issue involved economically powerful states pressuring other littoral states to gain control
over the Arctic Ocean.
Possible Solutions
All solutions should either follow the current standards set by the UNCLOS or disobey them –
there is no in between . If the previous, then no countries would own the lanes. If the latter, then a
Research Report ◆ Page 3 of 4
Concordia International School Shanghai Model United Nations ◆ Seventh Annual Session
monopoly could be established on the sea paths. Either way, the issue of the UNCLOS standards must
be brought into this discussion.
Bibliography
"V.I.39 THE ILULISSAT DECLARATION ON THE ARCTIC OCEAN (28 May 2008)." International
Law & World Order: Weston's & Carlson's Basic Documents (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.
Macalister, Terry. "Rush for Arctic's Resources Provokes Territorial Tussles." The Guardian. The
Guardian, 6 July 2011. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.
Wanucha, Genevieve. "The Cold Hard Truth about Arctic Policy: Interview with Lawrence
Susskind." Oceans At MIT. MIT, 13 June 2014. Web. 13 Nov. 2015.
Research Report ◆ Page 4 of 4