117 / 532
101
WHAT IS THE LEGAL REGIME OF THE ARCTIC?
Convention on the Law of the Sea. This view, however, should be specified in that
sense that the Presidential Directive of the US President of 9 January 2009 says that
the most
effective
way to achieve international recognition and legal certainty for the
US extended continental shelf is through the procedure available to States Parties to
the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.
23
Vylegzhanin
24
also states that in the
document of the President of Russia of 2008 which refers to policy in the Arctic there
is only a reference to the international law in general and not specifically to the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Some opinions direct themselves to the possibility of inspiration from the legal
regime in Antarctica. For example, Morrison, a Canadian internationalist, pointed to
this possibility in view of the comparable physical conditions and the regime based
on the Antarctic Treaty. Morrison also claims that representatives of the Arctic states
did not favour the application of the concept of the common heritage of mankind
in this respect.
25
When comparison with Antarctica is made and some common features are seen,
we can sometimes hear the argument that, when there is a special AntarcticTreaty, there
is a need for a special treaty on the Arctic.
26
However, we should admit a significant
difference between the two polar regions – Antarctica is land, a continent, while the
Arctic is sea, an ocean. This has large legal and political consequences. International
legal norms that apply to land territory and to sea regions are fundamentally different.
27
On the other hand, this does not exclude inspiration derived from the Antarctic
Treaty system. For example, the protection of the sea environment, which exists in the
Antarctic region, or a certain inspiration from the mechanism which regulates activity
in Antarctica.
Vylegzhanin
28
points out that the legal regime in the Arctic and in the Arctic
Ocean is not regulated only by the norms of international law of the sea and
certainly not only by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. He states,
however, that it is not impossible for the states to extend the application of the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea to the Arctic Ocean. He mentions the work of
several authors which contains a chapter devoted to the Arctic which is not in the part
about the international law of the sea. In this connection it is necessary to mention
that comprehensive reviews of international public law in the form of textbooks and
monographs
etc.
do not always include special reference to the legal regime of the
Arctic. When the authors refer to the Arctic at all, they are mostly concerned with the
23
National Security Presidental Directive/NSPD – 66 Homeland Security Presidental Directive/HSPD
– 25, January 9, 2009.
24
Vylegzhanin, A. N., Developing International Law Teachings for Preventing Inter-State Disaccord in
the Arctic Ocean. 2009,
ZaoRV
69/3, p. 670.
25
Morrison in: Vylegzhanin, A. N.,
op.cit.
, p. 672.
26
Concepts in: Winkler, T.,
op.cit.
, p. 642.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid.
, p. 672.