Space and timing: why was the Barents Sea delimitation dispute resolved in 2010?

Moe, Arild; Fjærtoft, Daniel; Øverland, Indra

doi:10.1080/1088937x.2011.597887

Cited by 58 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The overlapping disputed area was about 175,000 square km (some 50,000 square nm) large, equivalent to over half of the Norwegian mainland territory (Moe et al, 2011).…”

Section: Before the Barents Sea Maritime Boundary Agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An accidental entanglement in the Barents Sea could lock the two countries into a negative spiral of actions and counteractions, or a long-term cold front in Russian-Western relations over a matter such as Ukraine could cast long shadows over the bilateral relationship between the two countries. The Barents Sea and its petroleum province are divided in two by the 1,680-km Norwegian-Russian maritime boundary (Moe, Fjaertoft, & Overland, 2011;Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2011, p. 61). The length of this boundary, greater than the distance between Berlin and Moscow, means that the two countries have extensive and complex relations.…”

Section: Indra Overland and Andrey Krivorotovmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Norwegian–Russian political relations and Barents oil and gas developments

Øverland¹,

Krivorotov²

2015

International Arctic Petroleum Cooperation: Barents Sea Scenarios

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The overlapping disputed area was about 175,000 square km (some 50,000 square nm) large, equivalent to over half of the Norwegian mainland territory (Moe et al, 2011).…”

Section: Before the Barents Sea Maritime Boundary Agreementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Indra Overland and Andrey Krivorotovmentioning

confidence: 99%

Norwegian–Russian political relations and Barents oil and gas developments

Øverland¹,

Krivorotov²

2015

International Arctic Petroleum Cooperation: Barents Sea Scenarios

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…During the post-Soviet period, relations improved steadily-upgraded incrementally, first to 'constructive partnership ' (1994), then 'strategic partnership of cooperation ' (1996) and then 'comprehensive deepening strategic partnership' (2010) (Klein and Westphal 2016, p.1). Another sign of the improvement was the finalization of agreements delimiting the border between the two countries in 1991, 1994, 1998, 1999(Moe et al 2011.…”

Section: Summing Up the Four Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Did China Bankroll Russia’s Annexation of Crimea? The Role of Sino-Russian Energy Relations

Øverland

2017

Russia's Turn to the East

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter analyses bilateral Chinese-Russian energy relations, pre-and post Crimea. The signing of the Power of Siberia megaproject in May 2014, only two months after Russia's annexation of Crimea, created the impression that China bankrolled Russia out of the crisis. To assess the veracity of this impression, the authors draw a longer timeline of Russian-Chinese cooperation, examining general economic data as well as Chinese involvement in four concrete energy projects managed by leading Russian energy companies. They find that, in general, deals made from 2014 onwards are in line with trends that originated well before the current crisis in Russia's relations with the West, and that Chinese financial contributions to the sector are not as large as they sometimes appear.

show abstract

“…110 Concerning the UNCLOS-regime, both parties benefit from a stable legal regime in the FPZ specifically, but also in the Arctic at large. 111 And concerning national security, both parties have an interest in low levels of conflict for fear of coercive efforts by other actors within and outside the Barents/ Arctic region. 112 The interests that drive cooperation might, however, be subject to change (over time).…”

Section: Conflict Management In the Fpzmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Conflict at Sea: The Case of Norway and Russia in the Svalbard Zone

Østhagen

2018

Arctic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In 1977, Norway established a maritime Fisheries Protection Zone (FPZ) around Svalbard, yet avoided claiming an outright Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). A dispute with Russia over the status of the Zone arose. In the late 1990s, Norwegian enforcement of fisheries regulations became stricter, as fish stocks were in decline. This led the Norwegian Coast Guard to attempt to arrest Russian fishing vessels on several occasions, resulting in reactions from Russian fishermen, as well as officials in Murmansk and Moscow. In 1998, 2005, and 2011 specifically, incidents had the potential to escalate beyond a fisheries issue. Today, an event in the maritime zone is of concern to both Norwegian and Russian authorities. Given the potential volatility of events in the FPZ, how do Norway and Russia manage to avoid escalation in the case of a crisis? Whereas previous scholarly work has explicitly focused on the legal status of Svalbard and its maritime zones, or looked at how Norway manages fisheries in cooperation with Russia, this article brings forth new knowledge by examining the specific incidents in the Zone and placing these in the wider context of conflict theory. Limited to the Norwegian perceptions of the dispute only, this article adds to our understanding of this specific issue of Arctic conflict management and governance. Based on several years of data collection through interviews, the argument put forth is that Norwegian and Russian cooperation is based on both mutual interests and the socializing effects of cooperative mechanisms, which in turn are key to avoid escalation in crisis-scenarios. In sum, we need to recognise how a combination of economic interests and the effects of socialisation have enabled Norway and Russia to keep conflict levels low, when incidents at sea have occurred.

show abstract

Space and timing: why was the Barents Sea delimitation dispute resolved in 2010?

Cited by 58 publications

References 20 publications

Norwegian–Russian political relations and Barents oil and gas developments

Norwegian–Russian political relations and Barents oil and gas developments

Did China Bankroll Russia’s Annexation of Crimea? The Role of Sino-Russian Energy Relations

Managing Conflict at Sea: The Case of Norway and Russia in the Svalbard Zone

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About