You are on page 1of 15

Arctic Issues and China's Stance

The Arctic issue continues to heat up over the past years, causing
more attention from Arctic countries and concerns from non-Arctic
countries. This paper intends to provide some perspectives on the
value of the Arctic region, related international laws and
cooperation mechanisms, Arctic countries polar strategy and
Chinas stance on the Arctic.
I
The Arctic has abundant resources and important values in
scientific research, transportation and military affairs. The Arctic
countries attach increasing importance to the Arctic development.
1. The Arctic is rich in energy, mineral and biological
resources.
In 2009, United States Geological Survey estimated that
potential undiscovered oil and natural gas reserves in the Arctic
accounted for 13% and 30% of respective world potential reserves,
with 80% of them located offshore. According to statistics, current
oil and gas production in the Arctic accounts for 10% and 25%
respectively of the global output. The Arctic minerals include gold,
copper, iron, lead, platinum, nickel, zinc, diamonds, etc. The coal
reserve in the Arctic accounts for 9% of the world total. The Arctic
region has abundant cod fish, snappers, salmons and Arctic
shrimps, making the region one of the major biological protein
bank in the world. The climate change has caused the fish to move
northward from traditional fishing grounds in Alaska and the North
Sea, and the Barents Sea, Beaufort Sea and other waters in the
region will become new and major fishing grounds.
2. The scientific research in the Arctic is of importance to
the understanding of the Earth.
The Arctic shows the fastest response to the global climate
change. The climate warming over the past 30 years has shrunk
one fourth of the Arctic sea ice in summer time, and reduced the
winter ice caps and permanent ice caps by half. Changes in Arctic
atmosphere, oceans, land, ecology and society exert important
impacts on the climate as well as the economic and social
development in the Northern hemisphere and in the world. The icemelting in Arctic will raise the sea level, and the shrinking sea ice
will reduce the refraction of the sun, and the thinner ice cap will

speed up the release of methane and other greenhouse gases. All


this will further accelerate the global climate change. Therefore,
countries in the world, especially in the northern hemisphere, pay
great attention to the Arctic scientific research work.
3. The accelerated melting of the Arctic ice advances the
possibility of commercial use of three major sea routes in
Arctic.
At present, there are three passages: the Northwest Passage
which connects the Atlantic and the Pacific by crossing the
Canadian Arctic Archipelago, the Northern Sea Route which
connects the Atlantic and the Pacific vie the Russian waters in the
Arctic, and the Arctic Bridge which links Canadas Cape Churchill to
Russias Murmansk. The first two of the three routes are navigable
in summer time, and the section from Northern Europe to
Northwest Russia is navigable throughout the year.
With the continued warming of the global climate, it is estimated
that the Northern Sea Route will be navigable throughout the year
in 50 years time. By that time the voyage from Northeast Asia to
Europe or to the east coast of America via the Arctic routes will be
40% shorter than that via the Suez Canal or the Panama Canal,
and the transportation costs will be reduced by 20-30%. In 2012,
there were 45 transits through the Northern Sea Route, compared
to four transits in 2010. DNV, the Norwegian classification
institution, has estimated that there will be 430 transits through
this route in 2030. This will have a significant impact on global
shipping and trade. However, some experts believe that since the
climate change is uncertain, the use of the routes is difficult to
predict and maybe not so fast to be navigable.
4. The Arctic region also has important military and
strategic value.
The Arctic is situated in a strategic location linking Asia, Europe
and North America. Military experts believe that to dominate the
Arctic is to control the commanding point in the world military
affairs. During World War II, some channels in the Arctic waters
were important strategic routes used by the Allies against
Germany, and a great portion of Allies assistance was shipped
through the Arctic waters to the Soviet Union. During the Cold War,
the Arctic became the forefront of the US-Soviet confrontation. It
was the preferred route for both American and Soviet fighters and
their cruise missiles to attach each other and the best nuclear
submarine bases. With the end of the Cold War, the military

tension in the Arctic relaxed. At present, the United States deploys


the first anti-missiles defense system in Alaska and establishes its
space defense fortress in the Arctic. Russia deploys most of its
advanced strategic nuclear submarines in the Arctic to maintain its
nuclear deterrence.
The global warming has resulted in major changes in the Arctic
natural conditions, and the Arctic countries have begun to pay
attention to the development of the Arctic. Regarding the Arctic as
the new Middle East in energy resource, the new lifeline in
global economy and the new commanding point in world military
affairs, they have increased inputs in scientific research and
political, economic and military activities, and make efforts to
dominate the future Arctic affairs.

II
There is a basic international legal regime for the Arctic region.
However, the coastal states in the Arctic have quite a few disputes
concerning attribution of some Arctic waters.
1. There is no integrated system of international law for
the Arctic, however, a basic legal framework is provided by
international laws including a series of conventions for
dealing with Arctic issues.
(1) Documents of regional international laws and regional
cooperation system, such as the Protection of Polar Bears
Agreement concluded by five Arctic countries, the non-legal
binding Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy adopted by the
Environment Council of Ministers of the Arctic, and the Arctic
Council the regional sustainable development mechanism.
(2) International environmental convention suitable to the Arctic.
Since the Arctic region is mostly affected by climate change,
reduced ozone layer and persistent organic pollutants (POPS) and
other global environmental problems, the Arctic countries have
played an important role in the making of the most of the
international environmental conventions.
(3) The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
(UNCLOS) and international legal documents by the International
Maritime Organization, including directions for vessels sailing in
polar icy waters adopted especially for Arctic navigation
conditions. The UNCLOS relates to all aspects of maritime
delimitation, marine environmental protection, navigation and

marine scientific research, and provides the basic rights and


obligations of coastal states and other countries. In 2008, foreign
ministers from five Arctic Ocean countries published the Ilulissat
Declaration, confirming the basic legal status of the Law of the Sea
in the Arctic.
(4) The Treaty concerning the Archipelago of Spitsbergen. The
Treaty, while recognizing the full and absolute sovereignty of
Norway over all the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, stipulates the
principle of equality of citizens of any of the signatory countries
and the principle of peaceful use of the Islands, thus making the
Treaty a unique Arctic legal regime.
In addition, the UNCLOS and the Treaty concerning the
Archipelago of Spitsbergen constitute important legal basis for
non-Arctic countries in their participation of Arctic activities.
2. Although the UNCLOS, the Treaty concerning the Archipelago of Spitsbergen and others have established the
basic international legal framework for the Arctic, there are
still some disputes which make the legal status of some
Arctic waters uncertain.
(1) Disputes over attribution of some Arctic waters. Part of the
adjacent maritime boundaries among Arctic countries has not been
delineated, and there are also serious differences over the
continental shelf attribution of the Arctic Ocean. (a) Russia and the
United States concluded in 1990 the Schevardnadze-Baker Treaty
over the Bering Sea, by which two-thirds of the Bering Strait and
the Bering Sea belong to the United States. However the Russian
Parliament believes the treaty would affect resource allocation in
the Baring Sea so that it has not ratified the treaty. (b) The United
States and Canada have not delineated their maritime boundaries
over the Beaufort Sea, with the controversial area of 21,000 square
kilometers. (c) In order to expand jurisdictional waters, the Arctic
coastal states use straight baselines to determine territorial waters
and exclusive economic zone. The United States and European
countries have made objections to straight baselines practice of
Russia, Canada and Denmark.
Norway and Russia had long-standing differences over
attribution of the Barents Sea waters, with the disputed sea area of
175,000 square kilometers. The negotiations between the two
sides lasted for 40 years. In 2010, the two countries reached an
agreement on the delimitation of the Barents Sea, agreeing to
divide the disputed areas into two roughly equal parts, with the
west part belonging to Norway while the east part belonging to
Russia. On this basis, the two sides agreed to make arrangements

on fishery cooperation in the related waters and cross-border oil


and gas development. This was a positive development.
(2) Disputes over outer continental shelf. Russia, Canada and
Denmark consider the Lomonosov Ridge under the Arctic Ocean
extension of their mainland, and claim the sovereign rights over
the 200 nautical miles outer continental shelf. Canada has claimed
its sovereignty over parts of the Arctic waters since the 1950s. In
2001, Russia handed in its continental shelf application to the UN
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS), and
claimed that nearly half of the Arctic seabed including the North
Pole to be Russias continental shelf, covering an area of 4.12
million square km and accounting for nearly half of the area
outside of 200 nautical miles. The CLCS returned the application
back to Russia for lack of evidence. Russia is expected to continue
its application. The United States and Canada conducted joint
geological surveys in the Arctic Ocean. As a result, the US claims
that its outer continental shelf in the Arctic extends far northward
which covers an area twice as large as California, and it might
overlap with the area which Russia claims.
In 2006, Norway submitted to the CLCS its outer continental
shelf application covering the Norwegian Sea, the Barents Sea and
other waters. In April 2009, the CLCS made recommendations to
Norway on the outer limits of the outer continental shelf, thus
Norway becoming the first Arctic country to have delineation of the
outer continental shelf.
(3) Disputes concerning the Arctic sea route jurisdiction and the
rights of passage. Russia and Canada step up jurisdiction over
Arctic navigation routes through their domestic legislations. In
particular they delineate parts of waters in the Northern Sea Route
and the Northwest Passage as internal waters by claiming
historical rights and using straight baselines, and request foreign
vessels to navigate with permission. The United States, in the
name of the freedom of navigation, regards the internal waters
claimed by Russia and Canada to be international waters and
challenges Russian and Canadian jurisdiction by passing the
Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage without permission. For
years the United States and Russia have not be able to reach an
agreement. The United States and Canada, through consultations,
reached the Arctic Cooperation Agreement in January 1988.
According to the agreement, the US vessels, subject to permission,
could navigate in Canadas northern waters including the
Northwest Passage. The agreement also states that both sides
reserve their respective positions on the legal status of the
Northwest Passage. In addition to the United States, the European

Union officially lodged its objection to Canadas practice of


delineating the Northwest Passage as its internal waters.
(4) Disputes over the Treaty concerning the Archipelago of
Spitsbergen. When the Treaty was concluded in 1920 for the
purpose of solving the controversy between Russia, Norway and
other countries over mineral ownership on Arctic archipelago of
Svalbard, it recognized Norways sovereignty while providing that
citizens of any of the signatory countries enjoy free access to the
islands and the equal rights to engage in economic activities.
However, due to the compromising nature of the treaty, there
have been constant disputes in practice. (a) Russia and Iceland
insist that citizens of signatory countries could engage in
commercial fishing and oil and gas resource development activities
in the islands exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf.
Norway, however, insists that equal economic activities are limited
to the land and territorial waters of the islands. Recently the United
Kingdom and Spain have officially supported the position of Russia
and Iceland. (b) According to the Treaty, citizens of signatory
countries, subject to notification, could engage in economic
activities on the Islands. However, the Svalbard Environmental
Protection Act published by Norway in 2002 stipulated that many
commercial activities are subject to Norwegian permission. Russia
believes that the Act seriously undermines the substantive rights
of signatory countries to economic activities on the Islands.
Owing to the fact of uncompleted delimitation on exclusive
economic zone, continental shelf and, in particular, the outer
continental shelf, the uncertainty of legal status concerning the
marine areas in the Arctic is likely to affect future cooperation in
the Arctic region. The countries concerned should abide by the
UNCLOS and other relevant international laws and agreements
and, based on scientific data, resolve disputes through peaceful
consultation and negotiation.
Moreover, the accelerated ice-melting not only brings new
opportunities such as opening of Arctic waterways and economic
development in the region, but also poses new challenges to
fragile Arctic ecological environment. The international community
should also, on the basis of the existing international law, consider
making more and targeted mechanism to protect the safety of the
Arctic navigation and prevent and reduce any environmental
impacts which might be caused by navigation.

III
On Arctic affairs, the Arctic countries are cooperative and
competitive to each other while taking acceptable as well as
cautious attitudes to non-Arctic countries participation.
The Arctic countries attach great importance to the Arctic
affairs, and they have formulated, one after another, their Arctic
strategies and policies. They emphasize regional cooperation, and
in particular the cooperation in Arctic scientific research,
environmental protection and sustainable development, which are
coordinated by the Arctic Council. For instance, eight Arctic
countries reached the Arctic Air and Sea Search and Rescue
Cooperation Agreement in the Arctic Council ministerial meeting in
2011; decided to set up a permanent secretariat of the Council in
Tromso, north of Norway; and is formulating Arctic oil spill response
agreement. It can be seen that the cooperation mechanism among
the Council members is strengthened and their sense for further
cooperation is increased. However, due to different situation and
position, there are also different emphases in their respective
Arctic strategies.
The United States introduced its new Arctic policy in January
2009. It prioritizes the assurance of navigation freedom, makes the
prevention of terrorist attacks against the Arctic and the reduction
of terrorist crimes and hostility in Arctic as the homeland security
interests, plans to build missile defense and early warning systems
in the Arctic, tries to resolve disputes concerning boundary
delimitation and define the Americas continental shelf, continues
its leading role in the Arctic scientific research and ensures the
balance between the Arctic development and environmental
protection.
Russia published its Arctic principle, policy and long-term
program in 2008 and introduced the Arctic strategy in 2010. Both
of them took the establishment of Russias competitive advantage
in Arctic energy development and shipping as its Arctic strategic
focus. At the same time, Russia strengthened infrastructure
construction along the Northern Sea Route and its jurisdiction in
order to control firmly its dominance over the Route, and
announced the formation of the Arctic military force to safeguard
the security of its Arctic area. Russia plans to have the outer limit
of its continental shelf to be defined before 2015 so as to lay the
foundation for the Arctic development.
In 2010 Canada issued the Arctic foreign policy statement.
Among the four priority policies, to exercise Canadas sovereignty
over its Northern area is the number one and non-negotiable

priority. Canada had slated US$ 109 million, to be spent before


2014, for research to substantiate extended continental shelf
claims.
Denmark published in 2011 the Arctic Strategy 2011-2020. Its
priorities are: supporting and strengthening the development of
Greenland, ensuring Denmarks important position in Arctic affairs,
solving disputes through international law and cooperation
mechanism and carrying out cooperation. Denmark plans to submit
to the United Nations its application for extension of the
continental shelf to 200 nautical mines in 2014.
Finland and Sweden, as non-Arctic-coastal states and the EU
members, published their respective Arctic strategies in 2010 and
2011. The two countries put the emphasis on important role played
by the Arctic Council in Arctic affairs. They also stress that the EU
should develop its Arctic policy and support EU to become an
observer of the Council.
The Iceland Parliament adopted in 2011 the resolution of Arctic
policy. The priorities are: to promote and consolidate the Arctic
Councils role in decision-making, to ensure Icelands position as an
Arctic coastal state so as to exert its influence on regional
development and on international decisions on regional disputes,
and to solve differences in Arctic affairs through the UNCLOS.
Norway specified that the Arctic affairs are one of the top
priorities in Norways foreign policy when it worked out its High
North strategy in 2006. And in 2009, Norway put forward seven
main policy priorities. It is committed to increase High North
activities and strengthen presence in the Arctic, improve
monitoring, emergency response and maritime safety system in
Northern waters, ensure navigation safety and environmental
protection, strengthen important cooperation with Russia and
promote NATOs active involvement in Arctic affairs.
It can be seen that due to clashes of interests among the Arctic
countries, continued efforts are required to have more mutual
trusts and intensified cooperation. In recent years, the Arctic
countries have increased their military presence and military
activities in the Arctic region and carried out frequent unilateral,
bilateral and multilateral military exercises to highlight their
sovereignty and power or to show determination to defend their
interests.
The Arctic policy of the EU should be mentioned here. In October
2008, the European Parliament passed a resolution which
recommended working out the Arctic treaty by following the mode
of the Antarctic Treaty. In November, the European Commission
issued a policy document on the EU and the Arctic region,

advocating multilateral governance of the Arctic. In December


2009, the European Council adopted the Arctic decision, prioritizing
on Arctic energy development and the use of navigation routes,
emphasizing the protection of fragile Arctic environment and
sustainable use of resources and promoting actively multilateral
governance of the Arctic. In July 2012 the EU published a new
document on its Arctic policy in which the EU initiated policy
objectives and action proposals for more investments in the Arctic.
In order to remove misgivings from the Arctic countries, the EU
stopped mentioning multilateral governance.
Being wary of the Arctic governance discussed by non-Arctic
states, the Arctic countries stress that the Arctic region, without
being in a legal vacuum, has applicable international laws
including the UNCLOS so that there is no need to have a
comprehensive Arctic treaty. However, new rules and regulations
concerning Arctic navigation and fishery activities could be
considered.

IV
The Arctic cooperation mechanism is getting mature; the Arctic
Council is the most important regional intergovernmental forum.
The Arctic cooperation in various fields has started following the
end of the Cold War. The cooperation began in the field of scientific
research and environmental protection and expanded rapidly to
the field of sustainable development. Of late, energy development,
the use of navigation routes and other issues are put on the
agenda for cooperation.
At present, there are many regional intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and sub-regional
mechanisms which are devoted to Arctic scientific research and
sustainable development and cooperation. Established in 1990, the
International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) is the most
influential organization for scientific research cooperation, with the
aim of encouraging and supporting Arctic scientific research by
providing scientific advices and funds. In addition, the Arctic
Scientific Committee, founded in 1984, and the Ny-Alesund Science
Managers Committee, founded in 1994, is also important Arctic
research organizations. The Arctic Council was established in 1996
and is the most important regional intergovernmental forum for
discussions on Arctic environment and sustainable development.

Besides, there are other sub-regional mechanisms for cooperation


such as Barents Euro-Arctic Council.
Eight Arctic countries are official members of the Arctic Council;
six Arctic indigenous organizations like the Saami Council are
permanent participants; non-Arctic states, intergovernmental
organi-zations and the NGOs participate in the Councils activities
as observers. The United Kingdom, France, Germany, the
Netherlands, Spain and Poland, and the United Nations
Environment Program and other organizations are observers of the
Council. China, Korea, Japan, Italy and the European Commission
are applying for observer status, now they participate in the
Councils work as ad hoc observers. Singapore and India have also
applied to be observers. In recent years, the Arctic Council worked
to formulate relevant international regulations. In 2011, it worked
out the Arctic Sea and Air Search and Rescue Cooperation
Agreement the first time for the Council to develop a legalbinding international instrument. In addition, the Arctic countries in
the Arctic Council have strengthened their coordination to exert
their influence on negotiations of climate change, shipping code in
the Arctic and mercury treaty. With the increasing importance of
the Arctic-related relations, the Arctic Council will play a greater
role.
On the one hand, the Arctic countries hope to see non-Arctic
states participation in pragmatic cooperation in specific fields to
solve Arctic-related problems; on the other hand, they are
concerned that their dominance over Arctic affairs would be
sidelined. Therefore the Arctic countries have doubts over nonArctic states participation in the Arctic Council.
The Arctic Council, according to the rules of procedure, should
consider in April 2009 applications from China, Italy, Korea and the
European Commission for observer status. However it was reported
that certain Council members had misgivings to the EUs Arctic
policy, claiming that the EUs restrictions on imported seal fur have
affected livelihood of indigenous people. Therefore the Arctic
Council decided to postpone the acceptance of new observers.
However, the public opinion believed that deep-rooted reason for
this postponement was that the Arctic countries felt uneasy about
the EUs proposition of multilateral governance of the Arctic.
The Arctic Council, at its ministerial meeting in May 2011, drew
up new regulations on criteria and procedure for accepting
observers as well as the role of observers. Some of the seven
criteria for observers are: to accept and support the objectives of
the Arctic Council; recognize the Arctic states sovereignty,
sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the Arctic; recognize that an

extensive legal framework applies to the Arctic Ocean, including


notably the law of the sea; respect the values, interests, culture
and tradition of Arctic indigenous peoples and other Arctic
inhabitants; and to have demonstrated their Arctic interests and
expertise relevant to the work of the Arctic Council. Public opinion
believed that the Arctic Council actually raised threshold for new
observers as a result of more cautiousness about accepting new
observers, and it shows the Arctic countries have deep doubts over
the non-Arctic states. The forthcoming ministerial meeting in May
2013 is expected to consider again applications of new observers.
V
China respects Arctic states sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction according to international law, and wishes to strengthen
mutually beneficial cooperation on Arctic-related issues with various
parties.
1. China attaches importance to changes in natural
environ-ment in the Arctic, and actively cooperates with
countries concerned to engage in Arctic scientific research.
The Arctic is a region most sensitive to the global climate
change. Natural changes in the Arctic will be reflected in global
climate and especially that in the northern hemisphere. Since
China is a country in the northern hemisphere, the cold air
activities in the Arctic region and changes in atmospheric
circulation in high altitudes have a direct impact on weather and
climate in China, and have significant influence on Chinas
ecological environment, agricultural production and other social
and economic activities. The sea level rise in the world caused by
speedy melting of Arctic ice affects economic and social
development in Chinas east coast. Because the Arctic affairs are
related to many natural, economic and social aspects in China as
well as Chinas sustainable development, China attaches great
importance to Arctic affairs.
China has to learn more about Arctic climate change and to
understand impacts on China by such climate change. The Arctic
expedition and research are of great importance to China. They will
help China understand the Arctic impact of the global atmospheric
circulation and physical process and mechanism for weather and
climate, improve the weather forecast accuracy on natural
disasters and short-term climate prediction so as to enhance
Chinas capability in natural disaster reduction and prevention.
Starting its Arctic scientific research in the 1990s, China
officially joined the Arctic International Scientific Committee in

1996, and has conducted a total of five comprehensive researches


on the Arctic Ocean from 1999 to 2012. In 2004, a Chinese
scientific research station, the Yellow River Station, was
established in the Arctic region, and in 2005 China hosted the
Arctic Science Summit Week. Over the years, China has conducted
research on high-altitude physics, climate change, ecological and
marine aspects in the Arctic, and has established a preliminary
observation system and formed a high-quality team of experts.
China has also actively participated in various activities of the
International Polar Year. China cannot have conducted all these
Arctic research without cooperation with the Arctic countries.
The Arctic ecological environment is greatly affected by global
problems such as climate change and POPS. The Arctic countries
have taken effective measures to protect Arctic environment and
played a positive role in global environmental cooperation. China
has acceded to major international conventions on environment
and is fulfilling obligations of relevant treaties.
2. China is concerned about potential impact on global
shipping and trade brought about by Arctic ice melting, and
hopes to engage in pragmatic and win-win cooperation with
the Arctic countries.
The Arctic countries in their Arctic strategies emphasize they
would make efforts to develop the Arctic, to develop energy
resources under the condition of protecting environment, to make
use of the Arctic passages while ensuring the safety of navigation,
and to conduct intercontinental and transoceanic maritime
transportation so as to contribute to the world economic
development. Since the Arctic ice melting and the Arctic navigation
are of global significance, it is natural and reasonable for nonArctic countries to show their concerns over the Arctic issues.
China, being a major developing country, has become the
second largest economy in the world. To achieve modernization,
China has to realize industrialization, IT application, urbanization
and agricultural modernization. However, China is not selfsufficient in oil, gas and other resources. For a long time to come,
China will continue to rely on imported oil and gas. If in the future
the Arctic becomes the new Middle East in worlds energy
resource, China is willing to import energy resources from this
new Middle East in the Arctic in order to diversify its energy
imports. Like its normal trade cooperation with other countries and
regions, China will follow the principle of equality and mutual
benefit and win-win cooperation in carrying out cooperation with
Arctic energy resource countries.

For the same reason, if in the future the Arctic routes are
navigable, this will add another dimension of cooperation between
China and the Arctic countries. Because the voyage from America
and Europe to Asia will be greatly shortened, the European and
North American countries will certainly make good use of the Arctic
routes to conduct their trade with Asia, and this will also be the
case for China and other Asian countries. The voyage from
Rotterdam to Shanghai via the Northern Sea Route will be 22%
shorter than the one via the Suez Canal. The voyage from the
north tip of Norway to Lianyungang Port in China via the Northern
Sea Route is 6,500 nautical miles long while the one via Suez Canal
is 12,180 miles. To navigate the Northern Sea Route is fuel-saving
and cost-efficient and brings benefits to all parties. Of course, all
the countries must comply with related guidelines and regulations
for Arctic navigation.
In short, either in trade and investment of energy resource, or in
the use of Arctic routes, the international law, the regulations on
trade and investment and guidelines for Arctic navigation must be
abided by.
3. China wishes to become observer in the Arctic Council
to have close cooperation with both Arctic and non-Arctic
states and make its contribution to the peace, stability,
environmental protection and sustainable development in
the Arctic.
The Arctic Council is the most influential regional intergovernmental forum on Arctic issues. Of late, cooperation on Arctic
affairs is both deepening and broadening, and becomes more and
more institutionalized. It is now a mainstream in Arctic affairs. The
Arctic issues are mainly regional issues, but there are also transregional issues like climate change, shipping and others which
require strengthened cooperation at both regional and
international levels. China has the right to engage in Arctic
scientific research and navigation and has the willingness and
capability to contribute to the work of the Arctic Council. This has
been generally recognized by the Council members. China is
willing to strengthen mutually beneficial cooperation on Arctic
issues with the countries concerned.
The Arctic Council takes an open attitude to non-Arctic states
and relevant international organizations. The Arctic Council should
make an early decision on accepting new observers. It will help
establish a cooperation mode between the Arctic and the nonArctic countries in which they work together and jointly solve
cross-regional problems through positive interactions.

Since 2007, China has participated, as an ad-hoc observer, in


the activities of the Arctic Council, and Chinas participation is
widely welcomed. China has always supported the purpose and
objectives of the Arctic Council, respects Arctic states sovereignty,
sovereign rights and jurisdiction according to international law,
appreciates the active role played by the Arctic Council in Arctic
affairs, takes an active part in the Councils work and makes its
best efforts to contribute to the Councils work. At the same time,
China and the Arctic countries conduct bilateral exchanges and
dialogues to discuss how to strengthen cooperation on the Arctic
scientific research. Chinas policy, position as well as practice on
the Arctic affairs are welcomed and recognized by other countries
and are in line with the criteria, procedure and role for observer
status.
4. China is willing to promote the establishment of a winwin relationship of cooperation between the Arctic and
non-Arctic states.
So far as the relationship between the Arctic and non-Arctic
states is concerned, the Arctic states have bigger interests since
they enjoy sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the
Arctic region, and they should, as a matter of fact, play a bigger
role in Arctic affairs. Non-Arctic states have the rights to navigation
and scientific research, and they have reason to show their
concerns for the Natures change in the Arctic and the opening of
the Arctic routes. The Arctic and non-Arctic states have common
interests in cross- regional issues, and they should increase their
communication and cooperation. To recognize and respect their
respective rights in the Arctic region and concerns on the Arctic
issues should constitute the basis for dealing with the relations
between the Arctic and non-Arctic states. China, as a non-Arctic
state, takes part in the Arctic affairs mainly through international
cooperation and in particular through cooperation with the Arctic
states. China should make efforts to promote the establishment of
a cooperative partnership of mutual respects, mutual trust and
mutual benefits between the Arctic and non-Arctic countries.
In conclusion, Chinas Arctic policy should be a component part
of Chinas foreign policy. Its basic elements should be: in the spirit
of peaceful development of the Arctic for the benefit of mankind
and on the basis of mutual respects and enhanced understanding
and trusts, China will develop a normal relationship of win-win
cooperation with the Arctic countries and the international
community in the common endeavor to maintain and promote

peace, stability and sustainable development in the Arctic, so as to


make the Arctic part of the harmonious world.

You might also like