The best action the U.S. can take to support its claims in the Arctic is ratifying UNCLOS
CLAIRE CUTLER: U.S. ratification of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea is long overdue. As countries turn increasing attention towards the Arctic, it is time for the United States to ratify the Convention to add much needed legitimacy to its territorial claims in the region.
The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is a comprehensive international agreement that came into force in 1994 to govern nations’ behavior in and management of the oceans. Although 167 countries and the European Union are party to UNCLOS, the United States has yet to ratify the Convention. This is due to resistance from Republicans in the Senate, many of whom are averse to U.S. participation in most international treaties. Since ratifying UNCLOS requires a 2/3 majority vote, Democrats in the Senate are not able to ratify the treaty without at least partial Republican support.
To understand what UNCLOS means for American interests in the Arctic, it is important to understand one specific territorial delineation made under UNCLOS. Used as both a juridical and geographical term, the continental shelf refers to the area between a country’s EEZ and the edge of the geological continental shelf. Coastal countries may claim rights to the non-living resources on and under the seabed of their continental shelf, but they may not claim rights to the resources in the water column above their continental shelf. To claim these rights, a country must provide sufficient scientific information about the physical characteristics of the shelf and the resources under it within ten years of their ratification of UNCLOS. The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (the Commission) reviews these claims and makes binding decisions regarding the establishment of a country’s rights to the continental shelf.
Currently, five countries make claims to continental shelf territories within the Arctic region. Norway is the only country whose claims have been accepted by the Commission, which in 2009 granted the country rights to 325,000 square kilometers of continental shelf. Denmark’s 2014 claim to the Commission has not been accepted. Denmark claims 895,000 square kilometers, which would extend all the way to the edge of Russia’s Exclusive Economic Zone. Canada ratified UNCLOS in 2003, and made a 2013 claim to 1.2 million square kilometers of continental shelf. Canada has not yet provided sufficient scientific data to support this claim. Russia first submitted territorial claims to the Commission in 2001, after ratifying UNCLOS in 1997. The Commission asked Russia to revise their original submission, and their 2016 revised submission has not yet been accepted or denied.
The United States is the fifth country to make continental shelf claims in the Arctic. However, since the United States is not a party to UNCLOS, it cannot partake in the formal mechanisms for making claims to the continental shelf. The US’s claims overlap with both Russian and Canadian claims.
There are many reasons why continental shelf claims in the Arctic are such a contentious topic, and why the Arctic is considered by some to be the next arena for great power conflict. The most discussed of these reasons is security. In recent years, many countries have begun to consider the strategic importance of the Arctic. Russia has increased its military presence in the region, including test launching nuclear-capable missiles from submarines in the region. The U.S. Coast Guard has received funding to purchase three additional ice breakers, in addition to the two that they already have. Although rights to the continental shelf would not give any country control over the water column or military behavior in the region, they would generally increase the country’s power in any discussions about security in the Arctic.
Perhaps even more salient is the resources at stake with continental shelf claims in the Arctic. It is estimated that 16% of the world’s oil and 30% of the world’s natural gas are located under the Arctic seabed. A country with rights to the continental shelf would be able to exploit these resources. Conversely, should a country with interests in conservation gain rights to the Arctic continental shelf, they would be able to prevent extraction of these resources and the environmental harms that this extraction would cause.
Ratifying UNCLOS is the best way for the United States to add legitimacy to their claims in the Arctic. Since it is not a party to UNCLOS, the United States must rely solely on military power (or threats thereof) to defend their claims in the region. Upon ratifying UNCLOS, the United States would enter the ten-year period in which it could make formal claims to the continental shelf in the Arctic. The U.S. has the capacity to support these claims with scientific evidence in a proposal to the Commission. Ratifying UNCLOS would also signal that the U.S. is interested in participating diplomatically in discussions surrounding division of the Arctic, and would give the U.S. a new chance to lead these conversations.
Claire Cutler is a junior in the School of Foreign Service studying Science, Technology, and International Affairs. She is originally from Kailua, Hawaii.