The Effects of Global Warming on International Incompetence in the Arctic Region

Öz

In this study, "What are the conflicts of the regional states in terms of international law in the Arctic and what effect will global warming have on these disagreements?" Regarding the question, the data obtained by the documentary scanning method from various sources dealing with the effects of global warming in the Arctic region and disagreements based on international law were analyzed. As a result of this process, in response to the research question, "As a result of the current and potential effects of global warming, in the context of gaining weight in national policies and facilitating access to energy resources, the disagreements between the states of the region in terms of international law in the Arctic will deepen." The hypothesis put forward was confirmed. Thus, it has been found that the Arctic will gain more importance as the glaciers melt, becoming more accessible, and as a result, states will be more reluctant to resolve conflicts in the region and that the struggle against disagreements carries the risk of turning into a political and military struggle by moving out of the legal ground.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arctic
• North Pole
• Global Warming
• International Law
• Disagreement

Arktika Bölgesindeki Uluslararası Anlaşmazlıklar ve Küresel Isınmanın Bunlara Etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışmada “Arktika’da uluslararası hukuk açısından bölge devletlerinin anlaşmazlıkları nelerdir ve küresel ısınmanın bu anlaşmazlıklar üzerinde nasıl bir etkisi olacaktır?” sorusuna ilişkin olarak, Arktika bölgesindeki küresel ısınma etkileri ve uluslararası hukuka dayalı anlaşmazlıkları konu edinen çeşitli kaynaklardan belgesel tarama yöntemi ile elde edilen veriler çözümlenmiştir. Bu süreç sonucunda araştırma sorusuna karşılık “küresel ısınmanın mevcut ve potansiyel etkileri sonucunda, ulusal politikaların ağırlık kazanması ve enerji kaynaklarına erişimin kolaylaşması Arktika’da bölge devletleri arasındaki uluslararası hukuka dayalı anlaşmazlıkları derinleştirecektir.” şeklinde ileri sürülen hipotez doğrulanmıştır. Böylece buzulların erimesi sonucunda Arktika’nın erişilebilir hale gelmesiyle daha fazla önem kazanacağı ve buna bağlı olarak bölgedeki anlaşmazlıkların çözümünde devletlerin daha isteksiz kalacağı ve anlaşmazlıklar konusunda yürütülen mücadelenin hukuksal zemin dışına taşınarak siyasal ve askerî mücadeleye dönüşme riski taşıdığına ilişkin bulgulara ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Arktika
• Kuzey Kutbu
• Küresel Isınma
• Uluslararası Hukuk
• Anlaşmazlık

Kaynakça

1. Altunkaya, E. (2019), “US and the Arctic Region in the Era of Climate Change: A Brief Analysis of the Evolution of US Arctic Foreign Policy Since 2000s”, Istanbul Gelisim University Journal of Social Sciences, 6 (1): 183-199.
2. AMAP, (1998), “Chapter 2: Physical/Geographical Characteristics of the Arctic”, AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, Oslo: Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme: 9-24.
3. Anisimov, O. A.; Vaughan, D. G. (2007), “15: Polar Regions (Arctic and Antarctic)”, (Ed. M. Parry ve O. Canziani), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 653-685.
4. ArcticEcon, “Beaufort Sea Dispute”, 10 January 2011, https://arcticecon.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/beaufort-sea-dispute, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
5. Axworthy, T. (2020), “The Polar Silk Road”, China Today, Year 2020, Issue 11: 14-16.
6. Ballinger, T. J.; Overland, J. E.; Wang, M.; Bhatt, U. S.; Hanna, E.; Hanssen-Bauer, I.; Kim, S. J.; Thoman, R. L.; Walsh, J. E. (2020), “The Lomonosov Ridge and the Overlapping Outer Continental Shelf Claim to North Pole”, NOAA Arctic Report Card 2020.
7. Basaran, I. (2015), “The Lomonosov Ridge and the Overlapping Outer Continental Shelf Claim to North Pole”, Journal of Maritime Law & Commerce, Vol. 46, No. 1: 1-21.
8. BBC News, “Russia and Norway Sign Maritime Border Agreement”, 15 September 2010, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-11316430, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).

9. BBC News, “Denmark Challenges Russia and Canada over North Pole”, 15 December 2014, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30481309 (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
10. Boyd, R. (2016), Mineral Resources in the Arctic: An Introduction, Trondheim: Geological Survey of Norway.
11. British Petrol, “Natural Gas”, https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/natural-gas.html, (17.05.2022).
12. British Petrol, “Oil”, https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy/oil.html#oil-reserves, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
13. Bureau of Intelligence and Research, (1965), “U.S. - Russia Convention Line of 1867”, International Boundary Study, No. 14.
14. Byers, M. (2013), International Law and the Arctic, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. College of Law, “U.S. - Russia Convention of 1867”, https://fall.law.fsu.edu/collection/LimitsinSeas/maps/bs14a.html, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
16. Conley, H.; Kraut, J. (2010), “US Strategic Interests in the Arctic: An Assessment of Current Challenges and New Opportunities for Cooperation”, Center for Strategic and International Studies.
17. Erkan, A. Ç.; Eminoğlu, A. (2019), “Grand Strateji Olarak Kuşak ve Yol İnsiyatifinde Arktik: Kutup İpekyolu’nun Çin-Rusya Enerji İş Birliğindeki Rolü”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı: 145-173.
18. Government of Canada, (2013), “Partial Submission of Canada to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf Regarding Its Continental Shelf in the Arctic Ocean”, https://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/can70_13/es_can_en.pdf, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
19. Graeme, W. (2007), Canada and Arctic North America: An Environmental History, ABC-CLIO.
20. Griffiths, S., “US-Canada Arctic Border Dispute Key to Maritime Riches”, 2 August 2010, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-10834006, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
21. Grinev, A., (2020) “Anglo-Russian Rivalry in the American Arctic, Eighteenth to Mid-Nineteenth Centuries”, The Nothern Review, No. 49: 167-190.
22. Güçlü Akpınar, B. (2017), “Uluslararası Hukuk Çerçevesinden Arktik Güvenliği Politikalarının Analizi: Rusya ve ABD Örneği”, Savunma Bilimleri Dergisi, C. 16, S. 2: 83-118.
23. Gül, T. (2014), “Arktik’teki Rusya: Sorun ve İşbirliği Arasındaki Gel-Git”, BİLGESAM Analiz/Rusya, No. 1167.
24. Hornackova, N. M. (2018), “Hand Island Case: A Territorial Dispute in the Arctic”, Aalborg: Aalborg University.
25. İnan Şimşek, A. (2019), “Uluslararası Toplumun Kutup Politikaları: Arktik-Antarktika Karşılaştırması”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı: 207-237.
26. Kavas, A. Y. (2019), “Soğuk Savaş Sonrası Arktika Bölgesi Jeopolitiği ve Bölgesel İş Birliği Potansiyeli”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı: 25-44.
27. Kefferpütz, R. (2010), “On Thin Ice? (Mis)interpreting Russian Policy in the High North”, CEPS Policy Brief, No. 205.
28. Konyshev, V.; Sergunin, A. (2014), “Russia's Policies on the Territorial Disputes in the Arctic”, Journal of International Relations and Foreign Policy, Vol. 2, No. 1: 55-83.
29. Lanteigne, M. (2016), Not Stopping Cold: China’s Emerging Strategies in the Arctic, Asia Center.
30. Levin, D., “Canada and Denmark Fight Over Island With Whisky and Schnapps”, 7 November 2016, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/08/world/what-in-the-world/canada-denmark-hans-island-whisky-schnapps.html, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
31. Lim, K. S. (2018), “China’s Arctic Policy & the Polar Silk Road Vision”, Arctic Yearbook 2018.
32. McBean, G. (2005), “Chapter 2: Arctic Climate: Past and Present”, (Ed. C. Symon), Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 21-60.
33. Mikkola, H. (2019). “The Geostrategic Arctic: Hard Security in the High North”, Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA) Briefing Paper 259.
34. Moe, A.; Fjærtoft, D.; Øverland, I. (2011), “Space and Timing: Why was the Barents Sea Delimitation Dispute Resolved in 2010?”, Polar Geography, Vol. 34, No. 3: 145-162.
35. NASA Global Climate Change, (2022), “Arctic Sea Ice Extent”, https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
36. O’Rourke, R. (2022), “Coast Guard Polar Security Cutter (Polar Icebreaker) Program”, Congressional Research Service, No. RL34391.
37. Office of the Historian, “Purchase of Alaska”, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/alaska-purchase, (17.05.2022).
38. Office of the Press Secretary, (2011), “Executive Order 13580: Interagency Working Group on Coordination of Domestic Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska”, The White House, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2011/07/12/executive-order-13580-interagency-working-group-coordination-domestic-en, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
39. Overland, I.; Krivorotov, A. (2015) “Chapter 6: Arctic Climate: Past and Present”, (Ed. A. Bourmistrov vd.), International Arctic Petroleum Cooperation: Barents Sea Scenarios, London: Routledge: 97-110.
40. Oziewicz, E.; Bednarz, J. (2019), “Challenges and Opportunities of the Maritime Silk Road Initiative for EU Countries”, Scientific Journals of the Maritime University of Szczecin, 59 (131): 110-119.
41. Örnek, S.; Mızrak, B. (2015), “Arktika Bölgesi’nin Enerji Kaynakları ve Hukuksal Durum”, (Ed. H. Çomak, C. Sancaktar ve Z. Yıldırım), Enerji Diplomasisi, İstanbul: Beta Yayıncılık: 237-247.
42. Østhagen, A.; Raspotnik A., “Crabtacular! Snow Crabs on their March from Svalbard to Brussels”, 24 April 2018, https://www.thearcticinstitute.org/crabtacular-snow-crabs-march-svalbard-brussels, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
43. Petkunaite, D. (2011) “Cooperation or Conflict in the Arctic? UNCLOS and the Barents and Beaufort Sea Disputes”, New York: The City College of New York.
44. Polar Science Center, “PIOMAS Ice Volume Data, 1979-Present”, http://psc.apl.uw.edu/research/projects/arctic-sea-ice-volume-anomaly/data, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
45. Proehl, A. (2018), “Border Dispute with a Sense of Humor - A Map of the Canada / Denmark Border at Hans Island”, http://amproehl.com/blog/2018/6/24/border-dispute-with-a-sense-of-humor-a-map-of-the-canada-denmark-border-at-hans-island, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
46. Roto, J.; Sterling, J. (2011), “Resources in the Arctic”, https://archive.nordregio.se/Maps/05-Environment-and-energy/Resources-in-the-Arctic/index.html, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
47. Rowe, E. W.; Blakkisrud, H. (2014), “A New Kind of Arctic Power? Russia's Policy Discourses and Diplomatic Practices in the Circumpolar North”, Geopolitics, Vol. 19, Issue 1: 66-85.
48. Rudnicki, J. (2016), “The Hans Island Dispute and the Doctrine of Occupation”, Studia Iuridica, No. 68: 307-320.
49. Sancak, K. (2019), “Deniz Hukukuna İlişkin Temel Egemenlik Alanları Bağlamında Arktik’teki İhtilaflı Alanlar ve Hukuki Durum”, Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, S. 23: 17-34.
50. Schönfeldt, K. (2017), The Arctic in International Law and Policy, Portland: Hart Publishing.
51. Senftleben, D.; Lauer, A.; Alexey, K. (2020), “Constraining Uncertainties in CMIP5 Projections of September Arctic”, Journal of Climate, Vol. 33, Issue 4: 1487-1503.
52. Seval, H. F. (2019), “Arktik Bölge’de Uluslararası Siyasi Düzen: Teorik Bir Yaklaşım”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı: 1-24.
53. Stange, R. (2020), “The Spitsbergen Treaty”, https://www.spitsbergen-svalbard.com/spitsbergen-information/history/the-spitsbergentreaty.html (17.05.2022).
54. Taraktaş, A. (2019), “Kuzey Kutbu’nda Ortakların Trajedisi Sorununa Çözüm Olarak Küresel Müşterekler Önerisinin Değerlendirilmesi”, Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, 2019 Özel Sayısı: 45-63.
55. Timtchenko, L. (1997), “The Russian Arctic Sectoral Concept: Past and Present”, Arctic, Vol. 50, No. 1: 29-35.
56. The Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, (2022), “Submissions, through the Secretary-General of the United Nations, to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, pursuant to article 76, paragraph 8, of the United Nations Convention”, United Nations, https://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.htm, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
57. Tkachenko, B. I. (2012), “Comparative Analysis of the USA/ USSR Maritime Boundary Agreement of 1990 and Treaty Between Norway and Russia Concerning Maritime Delimitation and Cooperation in The Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean of 2010”, Asia-Pacific Journal of Marine Science&Education, Vol. 2, No. 2: 35-69.
58. United Nations, (1982), “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea”, https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf, (Erişim: 17.05.2022)
59. United Nations, (2002), “Agreement Between The United States of America And The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Maritime Boundary”, https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREATIES/USA-RUS1990MB.PDF, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
60. UNEP, (2013), UNEP Year Book 2013: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment: United Nations Environment Programme.
61. USGS Fact Sheet, (2008), “Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle”, https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/fs2008-3049.pdf, (Erişim: 17.05.2022).
62. USSR, (1987), Letter Dated 87/10/05 from the Head of the Delegation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to the 42nd Session of the General Assembly Addressed to the Secretary-General, New York: United Nations.
63. Wallis, D.; Arnold, S. (2011), The Spitsbergen Treaty, Arctic Papers, Vol. 01.
64. Yıldız, G.; Çelik, H. (2019), “Yeni Bir Egemenlik Mücadelesi Alanı Olarak Arktika: ABD - Rusya Rekabeti”, Güvenlik Çalışmaları Dergisi, C. 21, S. 1: 57-77.
65. Zelentsov, V. V. (2012), “Development of Arctic transportation in Russia”, Asia-Pacific Journal of Marine Science&Education, Vol. 2, No. 2: 9-16.