Canadian author and photographer Ed Struzik, who has written about the Arctic for nearly three decades, has an interesting post on the Yale Environment 360 blog about the ongoing debate over the need for an Arctic Treaty similar to the Antarctic Treaty System. While the latter has been highly successful, resulting in a continent dedicated to scientific research and free from militarization, it is more difficult to construct such a treaty in the Arctic due to its greater strategic and economic value. Struzik breaks down the current debate on an Arctic treaty into two camps: the “hard-liners” and “soft-liners.” The first group wants a new, multilateral treaty ratified, while the second group wants to harness regional cooperation within existing regimes like UNCLOS. His post quotes a variety of sources from both sides, making for an informative read.
For more thoughtful musings from Struzik, his 2009 book, The Big Thaw, is available from Amazon.
Arctic Treaty debate: Hard-liners and soft-liners