Challenges to the Arctic Region in the XXI Century: From Global Governance to Real Politics

Abstract

Known facts seems to show that the focus of both geopolitical and security supranational global and regional levels of concern in the Arctic region is diplomacy, economy, strategy and the military. The same used-to-be-dominant “classical”, Cold War political issues seem to remain central in the era of the World Bank Global Governance, the UN Millennium Development Goals (now revised) framework and mainstream discourse. In fact, both the mainstream international society and the European Union look for these and only after for the other factors of the scenario. Our main objective is to 1. Consider the role, at the regional level, of the existing economic, political and military fora that have been developed for deliberations and consensus decision-making between circumpolar indigenous peoples organizations, the Arctic states (the Nordic countries, Russia, Canada and the US) - especially within the Arctic councils and its sub-forums, working groups and taskforces -, and the Baltic States; 2. Discuss how have they managed hard power foreign policy issues (Cold War Era “tradition”) along with soft power ones (World Bank Global Governance and UN framework); 3. Identify the formal existing instruments they consider using to manage conflicts or tensions, co-operations or agreements among very different actors and complicated grammars to promote regional interests; 4. Signal the effective achievements in resisting the pressure of the main international society’s actors interests. We will try to demonstrate that the Regional Governance Capacity of the Arctic region includes a political, an economic and a military dimension that is influencing others, extending its action beyond its frontiers already and “conditioning” the will and the interest of many European and Asian countries concerning the Arctic. In this context, will global governance framework assure that the indigenous people’s security and environmental biodiversity is able to resist to the (still) dominant trends of the International System? The methodology will be qualitative, supported by a documental analysis. Institutional and comparative perspectives along with a systemic, geopolitical, (neo) realistic, and hyperscopic lens will be considered for studying this complex subject.