Terror Defense No Al Qaida Terror
Russia Defense No Arctic Conflict
Download 2.62 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Even if international tensions rise, cooperation in the Arctic between Russia and the United States will continue.
Russia DefenseNo Arctic ConflictNo Russian Arctic conflict – the Russian strategy focuses on solving domestic problems and is open to international cooperation.Sergunin and Konyshev 14 [Alexander Sergunin, PhD., Professor in the Department of International Relations, School of International Relations, St. Petersburg State University, Valery Konyshev, Ph.D, Professor of the Department of Theory and History of International Relations at St. Petersburg State University's School of International Relations, “Four dangerous myths about Russia's plans for the Arctic,” Nov 25, 2014, http://www.russia-direct.org/analysis/four-dangerous-myths-about-russias-plans-arctic]//JIH Myth #1: Since Russia is economically and technologically rather weak in the High North, the Kremlin puts an emphasis on Russia’s military strength to protect its interests in the region. This is untrue because, conceptually, the Russian leadership now realizes that most of the threats and challenges to the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation (AZRF) originate from inside rather than outside of the country. These problems are caused by a confluence of factors such as the degradation the Soviet-made economic, transport and social infrastructures in the region, the current resource-oriented model of the Russian economy, and the lack of funds and managerial skills to develop the AZRF. For this reason, Russia’s current Arctic strategy is of an inward rather than outward-looking character and aims at solving existing domestic problems rather than focusing on external expansion. Moreover, in developing the AZRF, Moscow demonstrates that it is open for international cooperation and welcomes foreign investment and know-how. As far as existing territorial disputes with other coastal states are concerned, the Kremlin has repeatedly underlined that all these disputes should be solved in a peaceful way and on the basis of international law (e.g. 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and 2008 Ilulissat Declaration). There is no possibility for military conflict in the Arctic – Russia and the United states will settle conflicts through diplomatic means.Sergunin and Konyshev 14 [Alexander Sergunin, PhD., Professor in the Department of International Relations, School of International Relations, St. Petersburg State University, Valery Konyshev, Ph.D, Professor of the Department of Theory and History of International Relations at St. Petersburg State University's School of International Relations, “Four dangerous myths about Russia's plans for the Arctic,” Nov 25, 2014, http://www.russia-direct.org/analysis/four-dangerous-myths-about-russias-plans-arctic]//JIH Myth #2: We are seeing a militarization of the Arctic and increased risk of military conflict in the region. According to the alarmist-pessimist school, there is growing competition among the regional players for the Arctic’s natural resources and sea routes. Such a competition inevitably leads to the remilitarization of the High North and future military conflicts. Naturally, Russia is viewed as both a driver and part of this dangerous process. This is a completely inaccurate interpretation of present-day Arctic politics. Military conflicts for the Arctic’s division (or re-division) are unlikely. The important interests of various states – including those with significant military potential - are at play in the region. However, most of these interests (including 75 to 80 percent of unproven hydrocarbon reserves) lay within undisputed Arctic territories, such as the coastal states’ exclusive economic zones (EEZs). As far as the maritime spaces and continental shelf beyond the EEZs are concerned, a clash of the above-mentioned interests will not necessarily degenerate into armed conflict. Conflicts are more easily settled by peaceful means. Evidently, if the U.S., Canada, Denmark or Norway - NATO countries bound by mutual defense obligations – or Russia and China with their own mutual defense commitments - resort to localized military actions, this may escalate a conflict into a large-scale armed one or even a war. The same holds true in case such actions are taken against any of the above actors. And this is in nobody’s interest. Moreover, engagement in military activities in the Arctic (especially onshore and on the sea surface) poses great challenges due to the remoteness of the Arctic military theater from the main territories of the potential adversaries, poorly developed civil and military infrastructures and the harsh climatic conditions. Needless to say, the outcomes of such conflicts are hard to predict. And finally, the hypothetical clashes’ impact on the Arctic fragile nature may be altogether disastrous. Therefore, one cannot rule out that the Arctic states will continue their military preparations in the region with a view to modernizing their navies, air and ground forces (mainly the border and ranger units), to protect their economic interests as well as to exercise their sovereignty over “their” sectors of the Arctic, should bilateral or multilateral tensions in the Arctic be aggravated. However, military force is unlikely to be used, for even a most insignificant armed conflict may lead to dangerous and unpredictable outcomes. It should be also noted that, in contrast with the Cold War period when Russian military strategies in the Arctic were dictated by the logic of global political and military confrontation between two superpowers or two military blocs (Warsaw Pact and NATO), Moscow’s current military policies in the region are driven by completely different motives. As the threat of a global nuclear war has disappeared, these strategies aim at three major goals: first, to demonstrate and ascertain Russia’s sovereignty over the AZRF (including the EEZ and continental shelf); second, to protect Russia’s economic interests in the High North; and third, to demonstrate that Russia retains its great power status and has world-class military capabilities. Even if international tensions rise, cooperation in the Arctic between Russia and the United States will continue.Klapper 15 [Bradley Klapper, author, Associated Press, “Despite tensions, US, Russia vow cooperation in the Arctic,” April 26, 2015, http://juneauempire.com/state/2015-04-26/despite-tensions-us-russia-vow-cooperation-arctic]//JIH IQALUIT, Canada — The United States, Russia and other Arctic countries looked past Ukraine’s civil war and other tensions Friday, vowing to cooperate on preventing oil spills near the North Pole and combating climate change in a region warming faster than any other. Assuming the chair of the eight-nation Arctic Council, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said nations needed to significantly reduce emissions of black carbon and methane, short-lived greenhouse gases that are particularly potent sources of the Arctic’s warming. He said firm reduction goals would be set at the next meeting of ministers in 2017 in Alaska. “These pollutants are a threat to everybody,” Kerry said. The announcement, while modest, added to the Obama administration’s expanding environmental agenda over its final years, which already includes cutting pollutants from U.S. power plants and agreeing last year with China to lower carbon emissions. The U.S. and other governments will take another stab at a comprehensive climate change strategy later this year in Paris. The Arctic’s rising sea levels could have drastic effects around the world, changing coastlines and inundating small islands, and potentially hitting low-lying areas from Bangladesh to Florida the hardest. While Kerry and other delegates noted the vast opportunities that come with receding icecaps, they all spoke of the need for clean and sustainable development that serves the interests of the region’s inhabitants. Not all was rosy at this biennial gathering of a body that prides itself in avoiding political controversy to focus on preventing ecological, humanitarian and even military crises as the warming Arctic offers new shipping routes, fishing grounds and oil and gas drilling opportunities. On the eve of Friday’s gathering, Canada’s environment minister, Leona Aglukkaq, met with her Russian counterpart, Sergei Donskoi, and voiced displeasure with Moscow’s ongoing military activity in neighboring Ukraine. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov didn’t attend the meeting, citing a prior commitment — an absence lamented publicly by one Alaskan Native representative. “It is important that we speak openly about the tensions between Russia and the West,” Michael Stickman said. But Kerry and Lavrov spoke by telephone Wednesday on the Arctic Council and other matters. Addressing Ukraine, the top American diplomat pressed Russia to remove its forces from the east of the country amid American claims that Russia is upping deliveries of heavy weaponry and training to Ukrainian separatists. “I challenged him,” Kerry told a news conference after the Arctic meeting Friday, saying the pressure for a Russian withdrawal must be maintained. Russia says it has no troops in Ukraine, but the U.S., Ukraine and European governments say the evidence over a year of fighting is overwhelming. The State Department has even referred recently to the rebels as “combined Russian-separatist” forces. Concerns with Russia’s motives encompass the Arctic, too, an area that holds trillions of dollars’ worth of oil and gas reserves and which Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin recently termed “Russia’s Mecca.” Just last month, Russia launched military maneuvers with tens of thousands of servicemen, dozens of ships and submarines, and more than 100 aircraft to check the nation’s readiness to protect its northern frontier. As the planet warms and opens up new chances to tap the Arctic’s riches, many have warned of a new battleground for resources emerging in the 21st century. Still, ministers from Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the U.S. stressed the positives as they met in the northern Canadian town of Iqaluit beside a frozen Frobisher Bay. “It is in no one’s interests to let problems elsewhere impact cooperation in the Arctic,” said Erkki Tuomioja, Finland’s foreign minister. “There is no room here for confrontation or fear-mongering,” Russia’s Donskoi said. His government hailed a plan to prevent an oil disaster in the Arctic Sea, the cleanup of which would be a logistical nightmare. And the United States, which sets the Council’s agenda for the next two years, presented an agreement by members to address black carbon, or soot, which is emitted by wood-burning cookstoves and diesel fuels. Strategies for doing so include reducing gas flaring during oil exploration. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 2.62 Mb. Share with your friends:
|