The politics of security and international law in Norway's Arctic waters

Abstract

Security policy challenges in the high north should be approached both as an insight into the international legal framework on which co-existence in the region rests and as a sober realpolitik analysis. Against this background, the objective of this article is to paint a more balanced picture of security policy options in Norway's Arctic waters, rather than observing contemporary general discourse on the topic might suggest. Management of marine resources, delimitation of unresolved maritime boundaries and relations with Russia in the northern maritime areas are used as examples to substantiate our main thesis which is that dispassionate diplomacy is more likely to resolve disputes than is military confrontation.

Securing sustainability: the case for critical environmental security in the Arctic

“…Arctic states have increased military spending and activities, and some have employed bellicose rhetoric while asserting their regional interests (Huebert and others 2012). While the United States maintained its post-Cold War Arctic military presence, militarised rhetoric and activities have increased in Canada (Huebert 2010; Lackenbauer 2010; Bergh 2012), Norway (Åtland and Pedersen 2008; Jensen and Rottem 2010), and Russia (Antrim 2010; Zysk 2010; Åtland 2011). Circumpolar states have reinvested in Arctic military capabilities and infrastructure and have undertaken sovereignty assertion patrols and more frequent military exercises.…”

Demilitarisation and neutralisation of Svalbard: how has the Svalbard regime been able to meet the changing security realities during almost 100 years of existence?

“….] could as a practical step help offset some of the tensions and potentials for conflict’ (Jensen and Rottem 2010: 81).…”

Rim Versus Non-Rim States in the Arctic Region: Prospects for a Zero-Sum Game or a Win-Win One?

“…In the rational game terms they both adopted a mini-max strategy, in which they chose a smaller gain. In this case, we can say that Russia and Norway succeeded in breaking the prospects of prisoner's dilemma and created a mixed game (win-win and zero-sum), in which they cooperated over the boundary, but they still compete over the energy resources (Jensen and Rottem, 2010). Adopting a cooperative approach, Norway influenced the behaviour of Russia that became more cooperative as well.…”