Opinion - Editorials   

Coveting the Arctic resources

The intensifying scramble, among countries proximate to the Arctic seabed, for navigational rights and control of oil resources should be viewed in the context of credible reports that the ice cover in this region is melting three times faster than it was believed. But international reaction has not reflected the concern and urgency needed to protect the world’s most fragile and life-sustaining region. Russia, Canada, and the United States have focussed on staking cl aim to the Arctic basin, said to contain about 25 per cent of estimated oil and gas reserves that remain to be tapped. In August, Russia’s Vice-speaker of Parliament, in a symbolic claim of sovereignty over the region, planted his country’s flag four kilometres beneath the ice at the North Pole. In response, Canada’s Prime Minister announced millions of dollars to build a docking facility to the north of the country and the U.S. dispatched a mission to survey the controversial seabed. The major bones of contention in the Arctic are the Lomonosov Ridge that stretches 1800 kilometres from Greenland near Norway to the Siberian coast and the coveted Northwest Passage waterway that passes through Canada. The latter is expected to cut by a third the sea route between Asia and the east coast of the U.S; an increasing prospect given the receding snow cover.

At issue is the scientific and legal question whether the continental shelf of the countries involved extends up to these disputed spots, the determination of which is fraught with challenges of mapping the seabed beneath the ice cap. Along with Norway, the relevant countries (the U.S. excluded) have to furnish scientific evidence to back their claim within 10 years of applying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas. The U.S. has first to ratify the 1982 Convention for it to be a serious contender. A race for control and management of the planet’s scarce resources has always been the hallmark of the epoch of industrialisation. But wealthy countries can ill-afford to ignore mounting and incontestable evidence on global warming, even as the imperatives of growth keep pushing towards new frontiers. The Antarctic Treaty System recognises the region on the South Pole as an arena solely intended for scientific co-operation, keeps territorial claims in abeyance, and forbids all military activity in the larger interest of humanity. A similar international consensus would constitute the most appropriate response to the unfolding challenge on the Arctic. The Worldwide Fund for Nature has advocated such protection, based on the role the icy Arctic plays in reflecting the sun’s rays and slowing the pace of global warming.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

The new thrust on education
Coveting the Arctic resources
U.S. ramps up confrontation with Iran
Concerns and complaints beyond the routine
What I saw in Darfur
123 Agreement: a response to Brahma Chellaney
An ‘expert’ unmasked
Unfortunate
ASI’s overreach
On the project
Mob violence

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu