Arctic Review on Law and Politics最新文献_第5页

Canada’s and Russia’s Security and Defence Strategies in the Arctic: A Comparative Analysis 加拿大和俄罗斯在北极的安全与防御战略:比较分析

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.3243

P. W. Lackenbauer, A. Sergunin

{"title":"Canada’s and Russia’s Security and Defence Strategies in the Arctic: A Comparative Analysis","authors":"P. W. Lackenbauer, A. Sergunin","doi":"10.23865/arctic.v13.3243","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v13.3243","url":null,"abstract":"This comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes. The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90123246","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Delimitation of the Continental Shelf in the Central Arctic Ocean: Is It Possible Nowadays? 北冰洋中部大陆架划界:现在可能吗?

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.3771

Valentin A. Koshkin

{"title":"Delimitation of the Continental Shelf in the Central Arctic Ocean: Is It Possible Nowadays?","authors":"Valentin A. Koshkin","doi":"10.23865/arctic.v13.3771","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v13.3771","url":null,"abstract":"Russia was the first Arctic coastal state to make an official submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in 2001. The purpose of Russia’s submission was the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Arctic Ocean in accordance with UNCLOS Article 76. The area claimed by Russia is a large portion of the seabed extending even to the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Canada. However, Russia’s actions regarding delineation in the Arctic Ocean have led to criticism from several Russian experts in the field of international law. This paper is a response to a series of articles by Ivan Zhudro and Alexander Vylegzhanin. It argues against their assertion that Russia and the other Arctic states could have established the outer limits of their continental shelf in the absence of CLCS recommendations through the delimitation procedure in accordance with UNCLOS Article 83. The article rejects the argument that during the delimitation the Arctic states could have used meridian lines (sectors) to exclude the existence of an international seabed area in the Central Arctic Ocean. The author challenges the position that the result of delineation under UNCLOS Article 76 would not be fair since the US has not ratified UNCLOS.","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"204 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74092146","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Impact of the War in Ukraine on the Indigenous Small-numbered Peoples’ Rights in Russia 乌克兰战争对俄罗斯土著少数民族权利的影响

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.4058

E. Zmyvalova

引用次数: 1

Comparing Russian and Canadian Climate Policy: Protecting Arctic Interests? 比较俄罗斯和加拿大的气候政策:保护北极利益?

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.3225

Meinhard Doelle, R. Dremliuga

引用次数: 0

Introduction: Security and Military Power in the Arctic 导论:北极的安全和军事力量

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.3831

Njord Wegge, Sigbjørn Halsne

引用次数: 0

Cumulative Effects of Industrial Development and Treaty 8 Infringements in Northeastern British Columbia: The Litigation Yahey v. BC (S151727) – Case Comment 东北不列颠哥伦比亚省工业发展的累积效应与第八条约侵权:Yahey诉BC案(S151727) -案例评析

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v13.3802

G. Amatulli

{"title":"Cumulative Effects of Industrial Development and Treaty 8 Infringements in Northeastern British Columbia: The Litigation Yahey v. BC (S151727) – Case Comment","authors":"G. Amatulli","doi":"10.23865/arctic.v13.3802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v13.3802","url":null,"abstract":"On June 29, 2021, the BC Supreme Court issued the verdict of the Yahey v. British Columbia litigation (S151727). For the first time in Canadian legal history, a First Nation Band (BRFN – BlueBerry River First Nation) sued a provincial Government for the cumulative effects of industrial development intertwined with Treaty 8 infringements. The proceeding lasted for six years (2015–2021), with more than 160 days of trials and dozens of hours of affidavits sworn, and it resulted in a ground-breaking verdict. The Court recognised that in authorising industrial development, the Province had been unable to consider and deal with the cumulative impacts that projects had on the traditional lifestyle of BRFN members, besides breaching its obligation to BRFN under Treaty 8. This comment argues that by recognising that the Province cannot continue to authorise activities that breach Treaty 8 and Section 35 of the 1982 Constitution, the verdict may pave the way to a real implementation of the FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed Consent) in the BC legal framework. The ruling provides that the BC Government and the Band engage in meaningful consultation and negotiation to enforce mechanisms to assess and manage cumulative effects on the BRFN traditional territory. The parties were given six months to negotiate based on the litigation outcomes. On October 7, 2021, a preliminary agreement between the BRFN and the BC Province was signed. Important issues had been addressed throughout the trial. From confidentiality and the duty to consult in good faith to the constitutionality of Court hearing fees and the possibility to obtain other kinds of injunctions until the trial; the outcomes of this litigation may well be considered as a milestone to advance the Canadian legal framework, further recognising essential rights of Canadian Indigenous peoples in terms of Constitutional, social, and environmental justice.","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89873688","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Review of Graham White, Indigenous Empowerment through Co-management: Land Claims Boards, Wildlife Management, and Environmental Regulation (UBC Press: 2020) 格雷厄姆·怀特:《通过共同管理赋予土著权力:土地索赔委员会、野生动物管理和环境法规》(UBC出版社:2020)

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2021-09-23 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v12.3465

David V. Wright

引用次数: 0

Testing the Limits of Jurisdiction in Investor-State Arbitration in Svalbard’s Waters: Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway 斯瓦尔巴群岛水域投资者-国家仲裁的管辖权范围测试:Peteris Pildegovics和SIA North Star诉挪威王国

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2021-08-25 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v12.3372

V. Schatz

引用次数: 0

Review of Joachim Weber (ed.), Handbook on Geopolitics and Security in the Arctic: The High North Between Cooperation and Confrontation 《北极地缘政治与安全手册:合作与对抗之间的高北》，约阿希姆·韦伯主编

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2021-06-30 DOI: 10.23865/arctic.v12.3254

Apostolos Tsiouvalas

引用次数: 0

Girjas Reindeer Herding Community v. Sweden: Analysing the Merits of the Girjas Case Girjas驯鹿放牧社区诉瑞典:分析Girjas案例的优点

Arctic Review on Law and Politics Pub Date : 2021-03-04 DOI: 10.23865/ARCTIC.V12.2678

C. Allard, M. Brännström

{"title":"Girjas Reindeer Herding Community v. Sweden: Analysing the Merits of the Girjas Case","authors":"C. Allard, M. Brännström","doi":"10.23865/ARCTIC.V12.2678","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.23865/ARCTIC.V12.2678","url":null,"abstract":"For the first time in the Swedish Supreme Court, a small Sami reindeer herding community has won an important victory affirming the community’s small game hunting and fishing rights. Because of protracted use and the concept of immemorial prescription, the Court recognised the community’s exclusive hunting and fishing rights, including the right to lease these rights to others. Such leases have long been prohibited by legislation and the State has retained its powers to administer such leases. This case signifies a considerable development in the area of Sami law. In its decision, the Supreme Court made some adjustments to the age-old doctrine of immemorial prescription, and provided insights into how historic evidence should be evaluated when the claimant is an Indigenous people. A common motivator for these adjustments is an enhanced awareness of international standards protecting Indigenous peoples and minorities. Even ILO Convention No. 169 – the only legally binding convention concerning Indigenous rights, but which Sweden has not yet ratified – is relevant when it comes to evaluating Sami customary uses. The Court addressed the problem of gaps in the historical material and used evidence from other parts of Swedish Lapland and adjacent time-periods, making reasonable assumptions to fill in these gaps. The Court imposes on the State the burden of proof regarding the extinguishment of already established Sami rights, as well as proof that extinguishment by legislation or expropriation, is “clear and definitive”. These conditions were not met in this case.","PeriodicalId":36694,"journal":{"name":"Arctic Review on Law and Politics","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80551955","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 9