Suchergebnisse

The Arctic is saturated with nuclear facilities bringing both benefits for regional economic and social development and risks of nuclear and radiological accidents and concerns about radioactive wastes. There is every reason to expect the Arctic will remain a nuclearized region during the foreseeable future. This makes it important to direct attention to issues of nuclear safety and security in the region. We identify several clusters of these issues in the Arctic, including the challenges of potential nuclear accidents, the handling of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, the cleanup of radiological contaminants, and concerns about nuclear security. An analysis of international conventions and voluntary codes of conduct shows that they are applicable to Arctic nuclear safety and security, but only in general terms. This suggests a need for an Arctic-specific agreement on nuclear and radiological safety, emergency preparedness and response, and cleanup of radiological contaminants. The outbreak of military hostilities in Ukraine in February 2022 has disrupted normal procedures for addressing issues of common concern in the Arctic. But the need for co-operation regarding matters like nuclear safety and security will not go away. Assuming it is possible to devise "necessary modalities" for restarting the work of the Arctic Council following the acute phase of the Ukraine crisis, an Arctic-specific agreement on nuclear safety and security could be developed under the auspices of the Arctic Council, which already has taken an interest in nuclear safety through the activities of its Working Group on Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response. Once such an agreement is in place, it will become important to consider the infrastructure needed to ensure that its provisions are implemented effectively.

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 comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes.
The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.

The following article revisits existing scholarship on human-centric approaches to security in cyberspace and argues that a holistic understanding of cyber security in the Arctic must include discussion of the use of cyber technology in the everyday lives of individuals and communities, addressing both the ways such tools enable and undermine human security. Simultaneously, the article contextualises the Arctic as a region undergoing rapid change as a result of climate change and increased digitalisation and seeks to understand the consequent implications for human security. In light of these considerations, the article analyses the existing constraints and possibilities that cyber security and digitalisation pose for human security and revisits them from a humancentric perspective of cyber security. It also seeks to contextualise such security influences in relation to the role of climate change and its influence on the region. Finally, several examples are discussed to underline the interdependent implications of digitalisation and climate change from a human-centric perspective of cyber security in the Arctic.

Abstract not available. 22 References.

Handbook on Geopolitics and Security in the Arctic: The High North Between Cooperation and Confrontation, edited by Joachim Weber, is part of the Springer series Frontiers in International Relations. Published in 2020, the anthology comes at a turbulent time in Arctic geopolitics, when the traditional supremacy of the Arctic littoral states has started to be challenged by lurking interests of non-Arctic stakeholders, and global anthropogenic challenges, such as climate change, keep raising questions as to the future of security and geopolitical balance in the region. The handbook comprises a compelling read with diverse areas of discussion that give an insightful exploration of the most pressing issues relevant to Arctic geopolitics. The multidisciplinarity of approaches employed in this volume and the variety of relevant topics covered have the potential to mark a turning point in international scholarship on geopolitical studies.

2014 marked important milestones for Afghanistan. It gained a new political leadership by a democratic election, the NATO International Stabilisation Force (ISAF) was withdrawn, and the country took the initiative to a wider and more trusting cooperation with its neighbor Pakistan (RFE/RL 2014). 2015 is a crucial year. We will get an indication of whether Afghanistan can stand on its own and if the (partial) military extraction was wise, and to what extent the new administration is viable. Adapted from the source document.