Troubles in the North: the new Russian submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
By Julia Cirne Lima Weston. LL.M in International Law at University College London; Bachelor of Law at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio Grande do Sul and Volunteer Researcher at the Institute for Internet & the Just Society.
The Arctic is a highly valuable region, mainly due to the high incidence of oil within its seabed. [1] This value is naturally accompanied by Law of the Sea disputes between States with conflicting interests, as in many cases in diverse regions of the globe. The dispute which this article seeks to briefly contextualise, according to a recent update, happens between Russia, Denmark and Canada.
A point to be emphasised is that, as we discuss the Continental Shelf, more specifically the extended Continental Shelf, the dispute in focus touches upon a sensitive topic: oil and gas exploitation. While we see other disputes of this kind in other regions of the globe, it is said that, in the case of the Arctic, we have a much larger volume of contested resources per claim than in other parts of the world.[2]
Since the creation of the Continental Shelf institute with the 1945 Truman Proclamation, custom regarding the right of States to declare a zone over which they have sovereign rights over non-living resources present in the seabed and subsoil has been consolidated. [3] With the advent of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982 came the concept of the extended Continental Shelf, which could go beyond the usual 200 nautical miles and extend to up to 350 nautical miles, as long as there is proof that there is a natural prolongation of a State’s continent in relation to the seabed. [4] In order for there to be a declaration of the existence of an extended Continental Shelf, States must submit their claims and proof to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) for it to be analysed and confirmed, or denied, by the organ. [5]
After a brief review of the basics, we return to the dispute in question. Russia, on March 31st 2021, submitted its new baselines for the calculation of its extended Continental Shelf to the CLCS. [6] The dispute lies, however, in the fact that the new baselines end up making Russia’s claimed extended Continental Shelf overlap with the Continental Shelves of Canada and Denmark, as well as their Exclusive Economic Zones. [7]
The strategic relevance of the Arctic is undeniable. This is because, according to estimates of the US Geological Survey, the region contains 13% of the undiscovered oil in the world, as well as 30% of its undiscovered gas.[8] Due to its geography, being a region which is surrounded by States, it is likely that, by the end of the official delimitation of the maritime claims, a great part of the Arctic’s maritime territory would be under the jurisdiction of at least one State. [9]
According to News outlet Arctic Today, the new Russian claim makes the State claim around 70% of the Arctic seabed. [10] The Canada Broadcasting Company says that the Canadian ministry of foreign relations insists in demanding the country’s sovereignty in the region according to International Law and is studying the Russian claim in order to emit an adequate response. [11] Until the publication of this column, no official position was published by either Canada or Denmark.
It is important to highlight in this case that, although CLCS is entitled to determine that there is the right of a State over the extension of its Continental Shelf, this is a merely declaratory pronouncement, elaborated by a team of scientists. [12] It is, thus, not up to the CLCS to judge any related questions to this institute, nor to coerce other States to respect the rights it declares as existent. [13] As such, any unresolved dispute must be resolved by peaceful means, such as negotiations or any of the means numbered in the UNCLOS, e.g. arbitration and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, for instance. [14]
There is still much to happen in the current case. In the meantime, we must await the official positions of the involved States. However, if they are to follow the form of the potential Canadian pronouncement, we shall probably have different International Law-based positions. We must also await the official CLCS decision regarding the scientific evidence provided by Russia regarding its extension. Nevertheless, it is of utmost importance that we focus on the Law of the Sea and its institutes so that the issue is resolved in the most peaceful way as possible, mainly considering the contested region’s relevance.
[1] WWF. Arctic Oil and Gas. Available at: < https://arcticwwf.org/work/oil-and-gas/>.
[2] TUFTS. The Arctic and the LOSC. Available at: < https://sites.tufts.edu/lawofthesea/chapter-eight/>.
[3] ICJ. Case Concerning the Continental Shelf. Available at: https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/68/068-19850603-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf.
[4] UNITED NATIONS. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. Available at: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf. Art. 76(8)
[5] ibid.
[6]COMISSION ON THE LIMITS OF THE CONTINENTAL SHELF. Receipt of two addenda to the executive summary of the partial revised Submission made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf in respect of the Arctic Ocean. Available at: <https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/rus01_rev15/20210401UnNvAs0021e.pdf>.
[7] CANADIAN BROADCASTING COMPANY. ‘You cannot claim any more:’ Russia seeks bigger piece of Arctic. Available at: <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/russia-arctic-ocean-canada-united-nations-continental-shelf-1.5983289>.
[8] US GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas in the arctic. Available at: <https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70035000>.
[9] TUFTS. The Arctic and the LOSC. Available at: < https://sites.tufts.edu/lawofthesea/chapter-eight/>.
[10] ARCTIC TODAY. Russia extends its claim to the Arctic Ocean seabed. Available at: <https://www.arctictoday.com/russia-extends-its-claim-to-the-arctic-ocean-seabed/?wallit_nosession=1>.
[11] CANADIAN BROADCASTING COMPANY. ‘You cannot claim any more:’ Russia seeks bigger piece of Arctic. Available at: <https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/russia-arctic-ocean-canada-united-nations-continental-shelf-1.5983289>.
[12] ROTHWELL, Donald; STEPHENS, Tim. The International Law of the Sea. 2, ed, Oxford: Hart, 2016; UNITED NATIONS. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. Available at: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf. Annex II.
[13] Ibid.
[14] UNITED NATIONS. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 1982. Available at: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf. Part XV.
About Post Author
