Suomen Toimikunta Euroopan Turvallisuuden Edistämiseksi
The seminar focused on the current situation in the Arctic region, bringing together the various views regarding the present and future trends of the region.
Among others speakers and panel members included: Liisa Jaakonsaari (Member of the European Parliament), Hannele Pokka (Permanent Secretary, Ministry of the Environment), Scott Brandon (Head of The Political-Economic Affairs Section, US Embassy Helsinki), Ulrik Tideström (Minister Counsellor, Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy of Sweden Helsinki) Hannu Halinen (Arctic Ambassador, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland).
17 December 2010, Friday 9.30–12.30 Little Parliament, Helsinki, Finland
The seminar focused on the current situation in the Arctic region, bringing together the various views regarding the present and future trends of the region. In particular, the topics covered Finland’s role as an Arctic actor, other national interests in the Arctic region and whether the direction is towards competition or cooperation. In addition to the traditional security aspects, at the seminar it was discussed what kind of environmental security concerns may be evident in the Arctic. Mrs. Krista Kiuru, MP, Chair of STETE, welcomed the prominent speakers and guests of the Arctic Seminar. She acknowledged the importance for Finland being an Arctic actor and recognized the value of Finland’s new Arctic Strategy that was released in 2010. Ms. Kiuru emphasized that cooperation in the region is vital. She also stressed the importance of the European Union in Arctic related matters, as well as stressed that the Arctic Council is a key actor in the development of Arctic policies and a valuable channel of cooperation.
The speakers of the seminar were:
Mr. Lassi Heininen took a holistic approach when exploring the geopolitics and security in the Arctic. Mr. Heininen claimed that Arctic is no more a workshop for only biological scientists but also for social scientists. Mr. Heininen also reminded how during the Cold War the Arctic was a scene of an arms race. What is more, the military structures are still there – a fact that must be taken into a consideration when talking about security regarding the region. Until the late 1980’s, Arctic was an arena of confrontation as it was highly strategic area both politically and military strategically. However, this all started to change even before the end of the Cold War. According to Mr. Heininen, Arctic is one of the first place in the world where one has had globalization, for example in the form of cosmopolitanism and growing readiness for self-determination by the indigenous people. In addition, rising environmental security awareness grew already during the 1970’s and 1980’s in the Arctic as a consequence by pollution and nuclear submarine accidents. This lead the region to become an area of transboundary cooperation instead of confrontation. According to Heininen stability became the ultimate aim of the states. When discussing about the current state of the Arctic affairs, Lassi Heininen maintained it all depends where one stands, in other words what kind of approach one prefers and whether one takes into an account the previous issues in the region’s history. Mr. Heininen finds that institutionalism versus so-called ‘Arctic race’ stance can often be discovered in the debate regarding the Arctic affairs. Despite of the existing border disputes in the Arctic Sea and independence claims in Greenland, according to him they are not conflicts as understood by politics. Most importantly there seems to be a cooperation tendency among the concerned parties. ’ Arctic five’ versus ‘Arctic eight’ may have a conflict but it is what politics is all about, thus this is only business as usual from Mr. Heininen’s point of view. For him, there is nothing new with globalization and environmental problems in the Arctic, as they already were happening before global warming. Moreover Lassi Heininen claimed that in the Arctic we have entered into a new kind of era – the Cold War is over. These days Arctic is peaceful and stable which can be considered a real achievement in the 2010’s. However the stabilization of the Arctic did not happen by accident but required decisive efforts. If nowadays Arctic is an arena for cooperation, the question is: are we able to see and appreciate that and how to develop this further?
Please find Heininen´s presentation from here.
The panel discussion covered:
National Interests in the Arctic Region – Competition or Cooperation?
Chair : Kari Huhta, Journalist, Helsingin Sanomat
Panel members:
Speakers brought into focus the fact that the Arctic region is acquiring new significance on the international arena. Despite of region’s history as a scene of arms race during the Cold War, and due to economical and political changes, Arctic can now be viewed more as a scene of cooperation rather than conflict or war.
The Panel’s Chair Mr. Kari Huhta pointed out that we seem to be at some kind of a tipping point with regards to the Arctic. He also raised the fact of uncertainty by maintaining that for example shipping in the Arctic waters may be ten or thirty years away – nobody really knows.
Mrs. Hannele Pokka was pleased that Finland finally has an Arctic strategy and can now continue the work by using the strategy as its point of departure. As far as she was concerned, it is Finland’s message towards Arctic cooperation. Mrs. Pokka also reminded how collaboration had started already from the famous Gorbachev’s speech in Murmansk, 1987, in which he proposed a nuclear free zone to the Arctic. Mrs. Hannele Pokka put forth a question how to have a sustainable development in the Arctic so that the vulnerable environment is taken into an account. She also brought into discussion the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group (PAME). According to Mrs Pokka, PAME will launch its new comprehensive review in spring 2011.
Among other things the aforementioned report includes voluntary and mandatory measures how international community handles the Arctic issues and activities. Later on during the panel Mrs. Hannele Pokka also called more discussion between the different bodies including the academics and Arctic Council states among others.
Mr. Ulrik Tideström confirmed that Sweden too sees itself as an Arctic actor. Mr. Tideström confirmed that Sweden is also putting together an Arctic Strategy in the near future. Just recently Sweden took part to a search and rescue mission together with the US Coast Guard in order to rescue a Greek bulk carrier. In addition, Sweden’s joint efforts with Russian ice breakers confirm the collaborational nature in between the Arctic countries. Sweden will have the Arctic Council chairmanship in 2011. Mr. Tideström suggested that perhaps the Arctic Council could spend more time on policy issues, as for an example it could do more with new search and rescue plans. He also asserted that it is in Sweden’s interests to have an open Arctic Council and Sweden would like to grant an observer status for the European Union. He emphasized that the EU has an important role as an Arctic actor, especially when it comes to issues such as the fisheries. On the whole, from Sweden’s point of view, Arctic is an arena for cooperation.
Mr. Scott Brandon acknowledged that issues such as the infamous Russian flag planting have raised the media attention while perhaps sidelining the actual proceedings that have taken place in the Arctic. Mr. Brandon pointed out that United Nations Convention on Laws of the Seas provides a way to deal with carving the borders in the region. He also maintained that the US already implements UNCLOS almost in its entirety and its ratification is a high priority within the State Department, whilst also the Department of Defense favors joining UNCLOS. Mr. Brandon added that collaboration prevails in the Arctic. For instance, despite of the fact that the US has unresolved boundary issues with Canada, has not disturbed their cooperation in mapping the seabed together. Russia and Canada are particularly important because of the common sea borders with the US. According to Mr. Scott Brandon, the US recognizes its need to work together with the other states, especially with the so-called ‘Arctic eight’. Joining with Mr. Ulrik Tideström, Mr. Brandon stated that as far as the US is concerned, reality is cooperation in the Arctic.
Mrs. Liisa Jaakonsaari agreed with Mr. Palosaari’s earlier presentation, and pointed out how Russia and Norway just recently agreed over a longstanding border dispute. However, her stance was that more cooperation is still needed. Also collaboration with the indigenous and local people is needed, as well as further diplomacy and confidence building. Mrs. Liisa Jaakonsaari brought into attention the European Union’s new report “A sustainable EU Policy for the High North”, in which she had been one of the shadow reporters. Furthermore, Mrs Jaakonsaari was glad to note that all the important issues were managed to include into the report. Mrs Jaakonsaari warned about the possible “Eldorado” like scenario and suggested establishing an interdependent and interdisciplinary panel of experts, just as has been done with the climate change panel.