ENVIRONMENT
The New
C o l d Wa r
The frigid north has much to offer and may have the
potential for causing greater conflict in the region.
S
cientists and epic disaster movies featuring
A-list stars serve as a constant reminder
that there are dangers, present and in the
future, attached to the reduction of ice at
the north and south poles.
In the Arctic, a knock-on effect of global warming’s
“big melt” is how new territory has become more
accessible and open to exploration, with petroleum
companies expressing great interest of what is
supposed to be buried below.
And these apparent gifts that lie below? Around 30
percent of the world’s untapped natural gas reserves
and 13 percent of the world’s untapped oil reserves,
so estimates the US Geological Survey, one of the
leading agencies of its type in the world.
From the petroleum companies’ point of view, that
13 percent equals around 160 billion barrels of oil.
With a number like that, you could probably walk
into the board room of Shell or BP and feel the thick
atmosphere of greed.
IMBO/ ISSUE 32/ '14
The question is: who has claim to what, and how
are these claims decided?
Denmark, Norway, the United States, Canada and
Russia all have formalised claims in the Arctic. These
claims are based on international law, allocating
each of them exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of
370 kilometers each along their coastlines around
the perimeter of the Arctic.
Beyond the EEZs are international waters, while the
seabed past the EEZ along with verified extensions
of the continental shelf (mightily called the “heritage
of all mankind”) are all administered by the United
Nations International Seabed Authority (UNISA).
Making this diplomatic cocktail more potent is
UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Upon signing and ratifying UNCLOS, the five EEZ
nations in the Arctic were granted a 10-year period
for making claims to the extended continental shelf.
If their claims are verified, it gives them exclusive
rights to the resources that lie below.
38