Plan can’t solve--competition is not just between US and Russia—includes other countries along the shoreline
Daily Telegraph 08 (6/11/08, “Russia plans Arctic military build-up,” Adrian Blomfield-Daily Telegraph’s Moscow correspondent http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2111507/Russia-plans-Arctic-military-build-up.html) Disquiet over the Kremlin's intent in the Arctic is likely to grow still further after Gen Shamanov, a prominent military hawk who was accused of war crimes in Chechnya, suggested that the focus of Russia's military strategy would shift towards "protecting national interests" in the Arctic. Russia had the capability, he said, to defend its claim to roughly half of the Arctic Ocean – including the North Pole. "We have a number of highly professional military units in the Leningrad, Siberian and Far Eastern military districts which are specifically trained for combat in the Arctic regions," he said. Russian assertiveness in the sensitive region was again on display yesterday when Nato jets shadowed two Russian bombers, designed for anti-submarine warfare, on a reconnaissance mission close to the North Pole. While the Kremlin attracted international criticism after a titanium Russian flag was planted on the sea bed underneath the North Pole last year, other countries with an Arctic shoreline have been accused of playing an equally aggressive role in militarizing the region. Stephen Harper, the Canadian prime minister, last year ordered military ships to the Arctic amid growing tensions with both the United States and Russia over competing territorial claims in the region. Russia, the United States and Canada have also announced plans to build nuclear icebreakers to defend their Arctic interests. US naval vessels and British nuclear submarines held joint war games in the Arctic Ocean last year, a development that aroused suspicion in Moscow. The five nations with Arctic Ocean coastlines – Russia, Canada, the United States, Denmark and Norway – all have sometimes overlapping claims to Arctic territory that exceeds maritime borders fixed by international law. A United Nations commission has been established to study the legitimacy of the claims. The issue has taken on added urgency as global warming causes the ice in the Arctic to melt, thereby raising the realistic prospect of harnessing the ocean's energy treasure trove for the first time. Russia, already the world's largest energy producer, has the longest coastline of the Arctic nations and therefore has filed the biggest claim.Despite occasional outbreaks of imperialist rhetoric, the Kremlin has consistently promised not to colonize the Arctic unilaterally and has pledged to abide by international adjudication on its territorial rights in the region. Russia won’t be aggressive—they’ll abide by i-law and only colonize if they gain international support
Daily Telegraph 08 (6/11/08, “Russia plans Arctic military build-up,” Adrian Blomfield-Daily Telegraph’s Moscow correspondent http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2111507/Russia-plans-Arctic-military-build-up.html) The five nations with Arctic Ocean coastlines – Russia, Canada, the United States, Denmark and Norway – all have sometimes overlapping claims to Arctic territory that exceeds maritime borders fixed by international law. A United Nations commission has been established to study the legitimacy of the claims. The issue has taken on added urgency as global warming causes the ice in the Arctic to melt, thereby raising the realistic prospect of harnessing the ocean's energy treasure trove for the first time. Russia, already the world's largest energy producer, has the longest coastline of the Arctic nations and therefore has filed the biggest claim.Despite occasional outbreaks of imperialist rhetoric, the Kremlin has consistently promised not to colonize the Arctic unilaterally and has pledged to abide by international adjudication on its territorial rights in the region. Despite Russia’s attempt to become a superpower, NATO-Russia relations are improving
Bloomberg 09 (1/29/09, Bloomberg, “NATO Sees Little Risk of Arctic Confrontation as Ice Caps Melt” by James G. Neuger-correspondent for Bloomberg in Brussel http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=agWnAbB2Xc_c&refer=canada
**De Hoop Scheffer is the NATO Secretary General
Superpower Status “I hope we’ll see that development soon,” De Hoop Scheffer said, referring to the improvement of NATO-Russia relations.The alliance chief is slated to meet Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov at a security conference in Munich on Feb. 6. Enriched by oil and gas revenues, Russia has served notice of its determination to regain superpower status by upping military spending, overpowering Georgia’s army in August and cutting off gas shipments through Ukraine this year. NATO’s role in the Arctic can include search and rescue missions for stranded vessels and emergency response to ecological disasters as the opening up of frozen shipping lanes increases the risk of accidents, De Hoop Scheffer said. While it is “understandable and fully legitimate” for allies to ponder the defense and security consequences, De Hoop Scheffer called on all countries in the far north to pursue “a military presence which is not overdone.”
AT: Russia-NATO conflict
No risk of conflict in the Arctic—NATO-Russia cooperation increasing
Bloomberg 09 (1/29/09, Bloomberg, “NATO Sees Little Risk of Arctic Confrontation as Ice Caps Melt” by James G. Neuger-correspondent for Bloomberg in Brussel http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=agWnAbB2Xc_c&refer=canada Jan. 29 (Bloomberg) -- NATO’s chief played down the risk of military confrontation in the Arctic as the melting polar ice cap threatens to trigger a race between Western countries and Russia for oil and gas resources. Increased Russian bomber patrols over the North Atlantic and the planting of the Russian flag on the seabed are not even a “nuisance,” North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said. “The word threat is unjustified and inappropriate in this regard,” De Hoop Scheffer told reporters today in Reykjavik. “I would be the last one to expect or to make any reference to military conflict, definitely not.” The U.S., Denmark, Canada and Norway -- all part of NATO -- and Russia have staked claims to Arctic raw materials, as thawing sea ice eases access to 90 billion barrels of oil, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Arctic sea ice shrank to the second-smallest size on record in 2008, and the breakaway of an ice shelf nearly the size of Manhattan island from the Canadian mainland offered dramatic evidence of the pace of global warming. Russia in 2007 planted a titanium flag on the floor of the sea under the North Pole, claiming an area that the government estimates holds 10 billion tons of oil-equivalent along with gold, nickel and diamonds. In a throwback to the Cold War, Russia has stepped up strategic bomber patrols in northern latitudes, and has begun training troops for combat in temperatures that can plunge to below -57 degrees Celsius (-70 degrees Fahrenheit). No ‘Imminent Threat’Iceland, on the front lines in any possible Arctic confrontation, hasn’t been unnerved by the pickup in Russian strategic patrols, Icelandic Prime Minister Geir Haarde said. “I don’t think there has been any imminent threat in these areas recently,” said Haarde, set to leave office in coming days after the economic crisis toppled his government and led to early elections. Canada last year staged its largest-ever military exercise in the high north, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper held a symbolic Cabinet meeting in Inuvik, the country’s northernmost town. “All parties, and that includes ourselves, but also our Russian friends and partners, should respect airspace when they decide to send aircraft into the air on patrolling missions, but I do not think that as we speak we either find ourselves in a nuisance or let alone in a threat environment,” De Hoop Scheffer said. Cooperation in the Arctic will be on the agenda as NATO seeks to rebuild ties with the Kremlin that were shattered by Russia’s five-day war in August with would-be alliance member Georgia, De Hoop Scheffer said. Russia won’t go to war over energy—no political interest
Amies 09 (1/14/09, Deutsche Welle-international broadcast of Germany, “Russian Security Plan Prompts Fears Over Future Energy Wars” by Nick Amies-journalist, http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,3938485,00.html) The draft document's announcement allegedly led to a number of Western nations reviewing their energy security policies in relation to potential threats emanating from Russia. It is therefore understandable, if reports of these reviews are true, that the European Union was more concerned than usual when Russia and Ukraine entered into their latest dispute over gas. Experts divided over possibility of actual gas wars While the document assumes the possibility of future military conflicts erupting over energy resources, it has prompted widespread disagreement among academics and security experts who are divided over whether the term 'gas war', currently used to describe diplomatic spats, will eventually become a literal term. "I think it is worth worrying about the possibility of conflicts being fought over energy resources in the future but in the case of Russia and Ukraine, it's highly unlikely that this would have been the case," Daniel Litvin, senior research fellow with the Energy, Environment and Development Program at Chatham House, the headquarters of the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, told DW-WORLD.DE. "It's not in Russia's interests to go to war over its gas supplies. The dispute with Ukraine has already damaged its reputation as a provider and has been economically damaging as well," Litvin added. "Russia continued to be a strong and reliable supplier of both gas and oil during the Cold War when its enmity with the West was at its highest so I don’t think this will be happen."