Cooperation before and in the Cold WarDuring the Cold War the Arctic was divided into two blocs and their specific military zones, somewhat isolated within itself. Therefore, Arctic cooperation was very limited on a non-military level. The military fronts in the Arctic, however, i.e. in the Barents Sea demanded bloc-wide cooperation such as in the NATO or in the Warsaw Pact. The strategic importance of Arctic areas in the Cold War spawned projects such as the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line in 1954 between the United States, Canada and Greenland[1]. The 1980s were marked by increasing fastening of the blocs after a period of appeasement agreements such as SALT or START in the 1970s and early 80s. Especially the Reagan administration emphasized the battle between “good” and “evil” and turned the Arctic into a “military theatre” (Heininen, Jalonen, Käkönen 1995: 31; Heininen, undated: 199). The first peaceful cooperative measure, however, was taken already before the Cold War (when it actually started can surely be discussed) in 1911 in the Convention Respecting Measures for the Preservation and Protection of the Fur Seals[2] in the North Pacific Ocean between the United States, Russia, Japan and Great Britain in order to ensure the survival of the massively overhunted fur seals in the North Pacific Ocean, namely Seas of Bering, Kamchatka, Okhotsk and Japan (Fur Seal Convention 1911: Art. 1). It is worth mentioning that the Convention did not apply for the subsistent native hunters in the area (Arts. 11, 12, 13). In 1920, the Treaty Concerning the Archipelago of Spitsbergen marked a further step in international Arctic cooperation. The Treaty was made between The United States of America, Denmark, France, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Great Britain and Irelands as well as its Oversea Dominions and Sweden. Furthermore, Russia is included in the legally binding Treaty, yet not as a contracting party, but rather as a country allowed to extract resources in Spitsbergen. The treaty grants Norway the right to be the legislative power over the islands and the Archipelago of Svalbard, within clearly defined boundaries. It furthermore states that all contracting parties as well as Russia have the same rights on the Archipelago in order to conduct research and the exploitation of natural resources in terms of mining or fishing. All parties shall also have equal access to all places on Svalbard. Most importantly, however, is the emphasis on a non-militaristic usage of the Archipelago. Norway, as the legislative power, is not allowed to construct any kinds of military compounds nor naval bases. Thus, Spitsbergen shall merely be the basis for scientific research (i.e. meteorology) and the exploitation of natural resources. Although not explicitly Arctic, the 1946 Convention for the Regulation of Whaling affected the Arctic region and all peoples living in it (Heininen, undated: 198). Increased cooperation in the Arctic started in the 1970s, when environmental problems caused by military, industry and traffic showed their effects on life in the north. These agreements, such as the The Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes and other Matters (London Dumping Convention) 1972 or the UN Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (Enmod) 1977, although not specifically Arctic, had effects for the Arctic area. Furthermore, the UN 1983 New Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) contained a special reference to Arctic Water delimitations. A specific Arctic environmental agreement, however, was the Agreement on Conservation of Polar Bears 1973 between Canada, Denmark, Norway, the United States and the Soviet Union (Heininen, undated: 198).
|
