Suchergebnisse

Naval blockade is an old form of warfare where the current restatement of customary international law on this issue – the 1994 San Remo Manual – leaves something to be desired. The article considers the history of the concept and its current regulation like the requirements for establishing a naval blockade and addresses also issues in relation to its enforcement.

This thesis deals on integration of ASEAN. The primary objective of this thesis is to find out the potential of ASEAN to be politically and economically integrated like EU, and the kind of difficulties it may face in a mid way. Since EU is a pioneer and benchmark for any integration and ASEAN takes EU as a reference, I choose EU as a base to compare the progress of ASEAN. As for the theoretical aspect, integration theory and its importance in global scenario is discussed. The research sought after the way ahead for ASEAN. This study is based on a comparative analysis of the development of both EU and ASEAN. The information and literature needed for the thesis will be collected from open source, which is easily accessible to all. After analyzing the historical background, present development and future prospect, I think ASEAN is turning out to be the successful regional cooperation. Even though ASEAN took reference from EU in its development, It don´t need to be like EU. Being the cooperation from different group of differently diversified nations, It can pave its own way forward and can lay good precedent for other upcoming regional co-operations. ; M-IR

New uncertainties in international relations have presented several states in the West with important choices regarding their national strategies for the Arctic. This article analyzes security challenges in the Arctic and North Atlantic region, as understood by some key North-Atlantic states, namely: the USA, Canada, Denmark, Norway, the UK, Germany and France. By analyzing how, or to what degree, the colder east-west security landscape since 2014 is reflected in these selected North Atlantic states' Arctic security strategies, this article seeks to improve our understanding of how the security situation in the northernmost part of the world is developing and being understood. Through applying a traditional understanding of security, the article identifies similarities but also significant differences among the Arctic and North-Atlantic states. Most notable when comparing the strategies is the rather unique global perspective laid out in the US security strategy for the region. The British, Norwegian, Danish and Canadian perspectives, on the other hand, stand out as more regional in nature. Germany displays a rather low profile in its approach to international security in the Arctic, considering its economic status in Europe. France reveals a strong concern for Arctic shipping and freedom of navigation, a perspective similar to the USA's, but with less global ambition.

Russia was the first Arctic coastal state to make an official submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in 2001. The purpose of Russia's submission was the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Arctic Ocean in accordance with UNCLOS Article 76. The area claimed by Russia is a large portion of the seabed extending even to the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Canada. However, Russia's actions regarding delineation in the Arctic Ocean have led to criticism from several Russian experts in the field of international law. This paper is a response to a series of articles by Ivan Zhudro and Alexander Vylegzhanin. It argues against their assertion that Russia and the other Arctic states could have established the outer limits of their continental shelf in the absence of CLCS recommendations through the delimitation procedure in accordance with UNCLOS Article 83. The article rejects the argument that during the delimitation the Arctic states could have used meridian lines (sectors) to exclude the existence of an international seabed area in the Central Arctic Ocean. The author challenges the position that the result of delineation under UNCLOS Article 76 would not be fair since the US has not ratified UNCLOS.

The advantages that some military establishments have enjoyed in the remote Arctic region are diminishing. The military secrets of the Arctic Ocean are being progressively uncloaked, as civilian polar research expands into areas previously known only to a few. This study examines the security ramifications of broadened international research into what has been the most inhospitable and exclusive operational area on Earth. Firstly, the study argues that successful military operations in the Arctic depend on extended knowledge about area-specific issues related to e.g. the upper atmosphere and magnetosphere, weather, sea ice, ocean structure and dynamics, seafloor bathymetry and sediments, as well as reliable target detection systems. Secondly, it finds that a number of nations, both Arctic and non-Arctic, have stepped up their polar research in recent years. Secrets once held by a few are now accessible to many through international cooperation, data-sharing and open-access publishing. Finally, the study concludes that knowledge proliferation is likely to level the Arctic battlefield. Lending terms from Mica Endsley's three-level Situation Awareness model, polar research will result in increasingly shared perceptions about the Arctic operational environment, contribute to a more uniform comprehension of the elements, and even enable new actors to project a future state of the Arctic environment.

For a long time, the Arctic has been regarded as a stable region with low tension. However, even though low tension prevails, it is a fact that the circumpolar region also encompasses some of the world's most capable and potent military capabilities. The key role of the Arctic regarding security issues, international relations and geopolitics, is sometimes underplayed or not fully understood. These aspects of security are investigated in this thematic issue of Arctic Review on Law and Politics.

On 1 April 2020, the Latvian fishing company SIA North Star and its owner Peteris Pildegovics initiated an investor-State arbitration against Norway (Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway) at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). This case is not only Norway's first ever ICSID case, but also the first publicly known investor-State arbitration in which an operator of a fishing vessel has brought a claim against a coastal State for allegedly unlawful exercise of prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction in relation to fisheries. The case raises intricate questions concerning the limits of jurisdiction ratione materiae and jurisdiction ratione personae of investment tribunals.

This article reviews and compares Canadian and Russian approaches to Arctic fisheries management through a three-part format. First, the complex array of laws and policies applicable to Arctic fisheries is described for each country. How Canada and Russia have addressed international fishery issues is also highlighted, including their participation in the 2018 Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement. Second, commonalities in fisheries governance approaches are summarized, including national commitments to implement precautionary and ecosystem approaches. Finally, contrasts in Arctic fisheries management are discussed. Major differences include the greater devolution of management responsibilities by Canada to Indigenous communities through land-claim agreements and co-management arrangements and Russia's greater success in formalizing bilateral fisheries management arrangements with its neighbours.

As Arctic navigation increases and states work, both at the international and the domestic level, at ensuring legal readiness, this article takes a closer look at regulation of Arctic Shipping in Canada and Russia. The analysis first focuses on the current domestic regimes that have developed over the past decades. It highlights that dissimilar political, economic and environmental contexts have shaped not only different shipping patterns off the Canadian and Russian coasts, but also dissimilar coastal state approaches that do not seem to converge noticeably under the influence of the Polar Code. The analysis then turns to challenges that lay ahead as existing regimes could be called into question due to receding ice cover and may need to adapt to evolving shipping patterns and technological innovations.

In a world marked by surging international conflicts, labour market globalisation, ever-widening economic inequities, steady improvement in the flow of information, and increasing possibilities for mobility over greater distances, the number of migrants on a worldwide basis is hardly likely to decrease in coming years. Immigration regulations are devised within a confluence of national interests, international laws, and attention to migrants' individual rights. The tension between these disparate considerations begs the question: How can we best safeguard both universal rights issues and European economic integration, as well as the Norwegian state's obligation, vis-à-vis the distribution of benefits, to its own citizens. We are moving into extremely complex ethical and legal territory, where there are no easy answers. In this book, the author puts Norway's immigration policy under a moral-philosophical loupe for a thorough analysis of various answers to key questions in the Norwegian immigration debate.

This book is aimed at anyone interested in immigration policy issues, but especially persons working professionally in the field, such as political philosophers, politicians, lawyers, case managers and political scientists. - I en verden der internasjonale konflikter stadig blusser opp, arbeidsmarkedet globaliseres, økonomiske ulikheter blir stadig større, informasjonsflyten kontinuerlig forbedres og mulighetene for å forflytte seg over store avstander er gode, vil antallet migranter på verdensbasis ikke bli lavere i årene som kommer. Innvandringsregulering finner sted i spenningen mellom statlige interesser, internasjonal rett og hensynet til migranters individuelle rettigheter. I lys av disse spenningene må vi stille spørsmålet om hvordan vi best mulig kan ivareta både universelle rettighetshensyn og europeisk økonomisk integrasjon, samt den norske stats forpliktelse overfor egne innbyggere i fordeling av goder. Vi beveger oss inn i et etisk og juridisk felt med stor kompleksitet, hvor ingen enkle svar er gitt. I denne boken legger forfatteren norsk innvandringspolitikk under en moralfilosofisk lupe, og drøfter grundig ulike svar på en rekke sentrale spørsmål i norsk innvandringsdebatt.

Boken retter seg mot alle med interesse for innvandringspolitiske spørsmål, men særskilt personer som arbeider profesjonelt innenfor feltet, slik som politiske filosofer, politikere, jurister, saksbehandlere og statsvitere.

For decades, Norway has been viewed as a role model when it comes to safeguarding Sámi rights as an Indigenous people in the Nordic Countries. Among other reasons, this is because Norway is the only country with a Sámi population that has ratified ILO Convention No. 169. Also, Norway has adopted a particular land law where one of the purposes is to survey Sámi rights to land and water. It is also said that Norway has worked actively to ensure adoption of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Norway has gained international recognition for this work, among others from former UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous People James Anaya, who in his report on the situation of the Sámi people in Norway, Sweden and Finland, stated that Norway, since passing the Finnmark Act 2005, has set an important example for the other Nordic countries (para 44).

A hundred years ago on 9 February 2020, the Svalbard Treaty was adopted in Paris, granting Norway her long-standing ambition: full and absolute sovereignty over the Svalbard archipelago. After a brief review of the negotiations that preceded the Paris decision, this article examines the main elements of the Treaty: Norwegian sovereignty, the principle of non-discrimination and the terra nullius rights of other states, peaceful utilization, scientific research and environmental protection. Focus then shifts to Norway's policy towards Svalbard and the implementation of the Treaty's provisions: what have been the main lines of Norwegian Svalbard politics; what administrative structures have evolved; to what extent has Norwegian legislation been made applicable to Svalbard? Importantly, the article also addresses how widespread changes in international law that have taken place since 1920, particularly developments concerning the law of the sea, have brought to the forefront controversial issues concerning the geographic scope of the Treaty's application.

The Arctic region has been the focus of considerable attention in recent years, often concerned with maritime claims and an alleged race for the region's resources. Against this narrative, the article focuses on the practices of Canada and the Russian Federation with respect to their maritime jurisdictional claims and the delimitation of maritime boundaries with their Arctic neighbours. The article provides an overview of the Arctic region and the international law of the sea with an emphasis on the baselines and maritime claims of the Arctic coastal states. Discussion then turns to the maritime boundary agreements that have been concluded in the Arctic region before overlapping claims to areas of continental shelf underlying the central part of the Arctic Ocean are appraised. The article concludes that Canada and the Russian Federation have enjoyed considerable success in resolving overlapping maritime claims and their pragmatic and innovative approaches coupled with existing regional cooperation bode well for finding peaceful solutions to Arctic Ocean governance challenges in the future.

In this paper we explore how post-petroleum security is continually shaped by both the micropolitical practices of everyday life as well as the changing geopolitics of energy landscapes. We focus in particular on the two-decade long struggle over access to hydrocarbon deposits outside the Lofoten, Vesterålen and Senja archipelago groups (LoVeSe), and show how local security perspectives permeate both national and international debates concerning the future of oil and the global climate challenge. These developments, we argue, are taking place in a paradoxical conjunction with Norwegian political establishment who along with the oil and gas industry insist on continued petroleum dependency as the only viable future. We further investigate how particular controlling measures have determined past, present and future narratives, and assess how alternative ideas that include multiple possible trajectories have found their way into national and global debates despite these efforts. The argument permeating this paper states that while oil remains a security concern to both proponents and opponents to oil development in the Arctic, the extent to which this situation is seen as a threat or a security provider varies greatly.

This article proposes a model of anthropocentric ocean connectivity based on the concept of human perspective as location. Within this location, anthropocentrism can be, but is not necessarily, an exclusive or dominant valuation of the human. In fact, conceptions of both anthropocentrism and of ocean connectivity are pluralistic. These and other pluralisms are borne out in this article's content and structure, which takes the form of explorations of anthropocentric connectivity in relation to four specific ocean-related human activities. First, Jan Solski applies understandings of connectivity as "flow" in the context of strategic ocean geopolitics. Second, Iva Parlov analyzes current doctrinal issues and interactions at the international level with respect to the legal regime for places of refuge for ships in need of assistance. Third, Maria Madalena das Neves examines ocean connectivity in the context of transboundary energy trade and market integration, with particular attention to geopolitical and ecological connectivity. Finally, Julia Gaunce proposes that the making and application of transnational rules and standards for ships in polar waters enhances certain connections and disrupts others, to the detriment of oceans and people, and that broadening connectivity especially in respect of Arctic Indigenous people(s) could help address challenges faced by oceans and ocean governance.