Арктическая политика России. Учебное пособие

military presence, which made the USSR the world’s foremost Arctic power. However, the Soviet Arctic policy was largely designed to extract material gain without due regard to environmental protection and social development in the region.

The finale of the ‘Soviet period’ in the development of the Arctic territories was marked by the speech delivered by the then general secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987 in Murmansk (Gorbachev speech in Murmansk–so-called‘the Murmansk initiative’):themovewasaimedat transforming the northern part of the globe from being a sensitive military theatre to becoming an international ‘zone of peace’ and cooperation. This initiative marked the outset of the end of the Cold War era in the Arctic and were supported by the Western community, the Soviet Arctic opened its borders.

4. late 20th – ‘the post-Soviet stage’.

After the collapse of the USSR, the Arctic was neglected (decreased population, many cities were deserted, the Northern Sea Route was not used, some military bases were abandoned, etc.). The once prosperous region was in the grip of a systemic crisis due to financing cutbacks and a breakdown in the system of state governance.

In the mid 1990s it became obvious that the RF needed an Arctic strategy which would account for the recent geopolitical changes. Thus, 1996sawtheadoptionofthefederallaw‘OntheBasicsoftheStateRegula- tion of Socio-Economic Development of Russia’s Northern Regions’, which generated a lively discussion among the politicians and public figures as to whether the government should develop and adopt an Arctic strategy. In practice, however, this was not realized until the 2000s.

In 1997 Russia ratified the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, limitingitsportionoftheArcticshelftothe200-square-milesite,thereby reducing its Arctic sector by 1.7 million square kilometers.

In 1999 a draft of a law ‘On the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation’ was submitted to the Russian Duma, but it did not contain a reference to the 1926 decree issued by the presidium of the Central Executive Committee of the USSR.

21

And evaluating the 1990s in general, one can point out that Russia’s actions with regard to the Arctic were reactive and unsystematic, the Arcticpolicy-makingofthenewRussiatotallylackedapoliticalandeco- nomiccomponent,andasaresult,economicactivityinthenorthfelltoa critically low level, provoking the massive out-migration to the country’s other regions.

Suggestions for further readings

Braden Moon, V. Soviet-NorwegianRelationssince1945//TheWesternPo- litical Quarterly. – 1964. – Vol. 17. – № 4 (Dec.). – P. 659–670.

Exploration of the Russian Arctic: from the Pomor koches to nuclear-powe- red icebreakers. Arctic Russia. – 5 February 2020. URL: https://arctic-rus- sia.ru/en/article/exploration-of-the-russian-arctic-from-the-pomor-koch- es-to-nuclear-powered-icebreakers-/.

History of the Northeast Passage: from idea to first success. Arctic Russia. 7 February 2020. URL: https://arctic-russia.ru/en/article/history-of-the-north- east-passage-from-idea-to-first-success-/.

Khorkina, S. Russia and Norway – conflicts and cooperation in Arctic exploration, 1893–1905 // A Nordic Journal of Circumpolar Societies. – 1994. Vol. 11, iss. 1. – P. 37–43.

Lagutina, M. L. Russia’s Arctic Policy in the Twenty-First Century // National and International Dimensions. – Lanham : The Rowman and Littlefield Publishing Group, 2019.

Laruelle, M. Russia’s Arctic strategies and the future of the Far North.

M.E. Sharpe. – Armonk ; New York ; London, 2014.

Mikhail Gorbachev’s Speech in Murmansk at the Ceremonial Meeting on

the Occasion of the Presentation of the Order of Lenin and the Goldstar to the City of Murmansk. – Murmansk, 1 Oct. 1987. URL: https://www.barentsinfo. fi › gorbachev_speech.

Semiryad N. Y., Voskonoinikov S. G. Russian Nuclear Icebreaker Fleet // Youth and systemic modernization of the country : collection of scientific articlesofthe5thInternationalScientificConferenceofStudentsandYoungScien- tists.In6vol.Т.2/ed.byA.A.Gorokhov.–Kursk:SouthwestStateUniversity, 2020. URL: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=42926356.

Shabalina O. V., Kazakova K. S. Expedition diary – insights into the history of organizing and conducting Russian Arctic expeditions in the early XXth century // Problemy Arktiki i Antarktiki. Arctic and Antarctic Research. – 2022. –

№68 (1). – P. 76–86. URL: https://doi.org/10.30758/0555-2648-2022-68-1- 76-86.

Zenzinov V. The Soviet Arctic // The Russian Review. – 1944. Vol. 3. –

№2 (Spring). – P. 65–73.

22

Questions for discussion

1.What are the main characteristics of the ‘initial period’ of Russian Arctic exploration?

2.Whatarethemaincharacteristicsofthe‘imperialperiod’ofRussianArctic exploration?

3.What were the main motives for the beginning of the development of the Arctic by Russia?

4.What was the role of Russia’s expeditions in the study and exploration of the Arctic?

5.What was the role of the Arctic in World War II?

6.What was the role of the Arctic in Cold War?

7.What was the status of Svalbard in relations between the Soviet Union and Norway during the Cold War?

8.WasMikhailGorbachev’sSpeechinMurmanskaturningpointininterna-

tional cooperation in the Arctic?

Research task

Make an analysis of ‘Mikhail Gorbachev’s Speech in Murmansk at the Ceremonial Meeting on the Occasion of the Presentation of the Order of Lenin and the Goldstar to the City of Murmansk’. Murmansk, 1 Oct. 1987. URL: https://www.barentsinfo.fi › gorbachev_speech.

The questions for the analysis of the Gorbachev’s speech – 1987:

–What were the political preconditions of the Gorbachev’s speech?

–What are the key ideas of the Gorbachev’s speech?

–WhatwerethegeopoliticalconsequencesoftheGorbachev’sspeech both for Russia and the Arctic cooperation?

Topic 3. General characteristics of the AZRF at the beginning

of the 21st century

Abstract. ‘The present stage’ of the Arctic development (since 2000 till nowadays). Key characteristics of the AZRF: territory, climate conditions, population, ethnic diversity, urbanization, infrastructure, resources, etc. Russia’s ‘returning’ to the Arctic in 21st century.

Inthe2000sthesituationstartedtochange:severallargepublicworks projects, including the Yamal Railway lines to Nadym and Yamburg, Varandeisky oil terminal, and Yamal-Europe gas pipeline, were resumed

23

and brought to completion, and the Arctic was again given priority in the Russian politics not only on paper but in practice as well. This situation was in large measure brought about by the growing prominence of energy sector in Russia’s policy-making and the implementation of several large energy projects (for instance, Nord Stream, the Baltic Pipeline System, etc.).However,RussiahadnothinginthewayofaconsistentArcticdevelopmentstrategyintheearly2000s.EvenwhenRussiasubmitteditsArctic shelf claim to the UN Сommission in 2001, experts viewed it as a spontaneous, unprepared move, and undoubtedly the planting of Russia’s flag on the North Pole seabed by an expedition in 2007 was regarded likewise.

On September 19, 2008 the then president of Russia Dmitry Medvedev signed the ‘Fundamentals of the State Policy of the RF in the Arctic for the Period up to 2020 and Beyond’ – the key document defining the strategy of development of the Arctic zone, and a State Commission for the Development of the Arctic was formed in February 2015.

The set of characteristics of the AZRF were listed in the Fundamen- tals-2008:

1)extremely harsh climate, including a perennial ice cover or drifting ice in the Arctic seas;

2)a patchy pattern of the territories’ industrial and economic development and a low population density;

3)remoteness from the main industrial centers, high level of resource consumption, and dependency of commercial activities and public utilities on supply of fuel, foods and basic consumer goods from Russia’s other regions;

4)instability of environmental systems, which are essential for biological equilibrium and climate on the planet, and their vulnerability to even small-scale anthropogenic effects.

As far as the main current national interests of Russia in the Arctic are concerned, according to the ‘Fundamentals of the Russian Federation State Policy in the Arctic for the Period up to 2035’, approved on 5 March 2020, they are defined as follows:

1)to ensure Russia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity;

2)to preserve the Arctic as a territory of peace and stable mutually beneficial partnership;

24

3)toguaranteehighlivingstandardsandprosperityforthepopulation of the Russian Arctic;

4)to develop the Russian Arctic as a strategic resource base and use it rationally to speed up national economic growth;

5)to develop the Northern Sea Route as a globally competitive national transport corridor;

6)and to protect the Arctic environment, the primordial homeland andthetraditionalwayoflifeoftheindigenousminoritiesintheRussian Arctic.

It can be stated that today the Russian Federation is the largest Arctic power, which has a number of specific characteristics (the largest territory, the largest number of the population, active economic development of territories, high level of urbanization, etc.) that give significant advantages to the Russian Federation in comparison with other Arctic states.

The AZRF covers the largest part of the Arctic territory: the AZRF’s territory stretches over 3,1 million square kilometers, accounting for 18 % of Russia’s territory. And still, just for comparison, it is worthwhile to know that although Canada is second to Russia in terms of the size of the national Arctic zone, although Canada’s Arctic sector, covering 25 % of the entire Arctic territory, is much smaller than Russia’s, covering 40 % of the Arctic. This fact at least warrants Russia’s status as ‘the biggest Arctic power’. With its control over the largest portion of the Arctic, Russia also controls most of the region’s resources. Undoubtedly, it gives enormous advantages to Russia in the region in comparison with other Arctic states.

Presently approximately 2,5 million live in the AZRF what is less than 2 % of the country’s population, but about 40 % of the Arctic’s entire population. Meanwhile, the population density in Russia’s huge Arctic territory is very low: for instance, in Nenetsky AO – 0,2 person per 1 square kilometer, in Chukotsky AO – 0,07 person per 1 sq km, in Yama- lo-NenetskyAO–0,7per1sqkm,andtheSakha(Yakutia)Republichas the lowest density – 0,05 person per 1 sq km.

The AZRF’s ethnic diversity, too, is arguably one of the region’s important characteristics and an important resource of AZRF: the

25

indigenous communities of the Arctic ethnocultural landscape presumably include Komi, Yakuts, and Russians, and 17 small indigenous minoritiesoftheArcticinclude:Dolgans,Kereks,Kets,Mansi,Nganasans, Nentsy, Sami, Selkups, Khanty, Chuvans, Chukchi, Chulyms, Evenks, Evens, Enets, Eskimo, Yukagirs.

Mostofthepopulationlivesincities,whichisevidenceofyetanother feature of the Russian Arctic – a high degree of urbanization. Let’s comparethepopulationcountsinthebiggestArcticcitiesinRussiaandother countries:threebiggestcitiesintheAZRFareArkhangelsk(351,488asof January1,2017),Murmansk(298,096asofJanuary1,2017),andNorilsk (178,018 as of January 1, 2017), whereas the Norwegian city of Tromsø has 71,000, and Reykjavik in Iceland – more than 100,000.

Yet another important characteristic of the Russian Arctic, as compared to the other countries’ Arctic territories, is the fact that the construction of a powerful industrial infrastructure, with the state’s direct support, has been afoot here for decades. At the same time, Russia’s Arctic economy is monosectoral and lacks diversity.

Another characteristic of the Russian Arctic is its large mineral resources and, consequently, the high priority accorded to their extraction andprocessing.Thelargestshareofprognosticatedhydrocarbonreserves is concentrated intheArctic’sRussian section;theRussian Arctic mainland boasts unique estimated resources of cupronickel, tin, platinoids, phosphates, rare metals and rare earth elements; it also boasts large reserves of gold, diamonds, tungsten, mercury, iron, optical materials and semi-precious stones; the Russian Arctic is also rich in marine wildlife. At the same time, many experts point to such characteristic of the Russian Arctic as it’s being underexplored.

Suggestions for further readings

Duhaime,G.andCaron,A.EconomicandsocialconditionsofArcticregions// TheEconomyoftheNorth2008.–2008.URL:https://chaireconditionautoch- tone.fss.ulaval.ca/doc/Publication/ECONOR-2-01.pdf.

Foundations of the Russian Federation’s State Policy in The Arctic Until 2020 And Beyond, approved by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on

26

September 18th. – 2008. URL: https://icr.arcticportal.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1791%3.

Foundations of the Russian Federation State Policy in the Arctic for the Period up to 2035, approved on 5 March 2020. URL: https://dnnlgwick.blob.core. windows.net/portals/0/NWCDepartments/Russia%20Maritime%20Studies%20Institute/ArcticPolicyFoundations2035_English_FINAL_21July2020. pdf?sr=b&si=DNNFileManagerPolicy&sig=DSkBpDNhHsgjOAvPILTRoxIfV%2FO02gR81NJSokwx2EM%3D.

Gavrilyeva, T. Comparative analysis of the trends in the development of the northern cities of the world and Russia // Conference paper. 55th Congress of the European Regional Science Association: World Renaissance: Changing rolesforpeopleandplaces,25–28August2015.–Lisbon,Portugal,2015.URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/124849/1/ERSA2015_01714.pdf.

Kontorovich, A. E. Oil and Gas of the Russian Arctic: History of Development in the 20th Century, Resources, and Strategy for the 21st Century // Russian Arctic. – 2015. – Vol. 41. – № 2. URL: https://scfh.ru/en/papers/oil-and- gas-of-the-russian-arctic-history-of-development/.

Laruelle, M. Russia’s Arctic strategies and the future of the Far North.

M.E. Sharpe. – Armonk ; New York ; London, 2014.

Mäenpää, I. Comparative analysis of Arctic economies at macro level //The

Economy of the North 2008. – 2008. URL: https://www.ssb.no/a/english/publikasjoner/pdf/sa112_en/kap3.pdf.

Schmidt, J. I. and Aanesen, M. Demographic and economic disparities among Arctic regions // Polar Geography. – 2015. – № 38(4). – P. 1–20.

Zamyatina, Z. and Goncharov, R. The Arctic urbanization: how to get resilienceinaconditionofpermanentdisaster?URL:https://az659834.vo.msecnd. net/eventsairwesteuprod/production-ersa-public/35244b89260741a2b8024e- 0015f40bac.

Questions for discussion

1.What were the reasons for the Russian leadership’s loss of attention to the Arctic in the 1990s?

2.What are the main consequences of the post-Soviet crisis for the AZRF?

3.WhichcharacteristicsoftheAZRFwerelistedinthe‘Fundamentals-2008’?

4.What are the main current national interests of Russia in the Arctic according to the ‘Fundamentals-2020’?

5.What are the major strengths and weaknesses of the AZRF?

6.What are the reasons for the change in the Russian leadership’s attitude toward the region in the early 2000s?

27

Research task

Make a comparative analysis of key characteristics of the AZRF and other Arctic states (on the student’s choice – Canada, Denmark, Norway or the USA) (table 1).

P a r t 2

RUSSIA’S DOMESTIC POLICY IN THE ARCTIC

Topic 4. Russian Arctic Policy: National dimension

Abstract. Domestic dimension of the Russian Arctic policy: the evolution of the main national interests of Russia in the Arctic from the early 2000s to the present, overview of Russia’s motivations, strategic priorities and new challenges for Russia’s domestic policy in the Arctic; analysis of the main strategic documents, institutions and decision-making process. Debates on the necessity of creation of the Ministry of the Arctic. ‘Pillar zones’ (‘opornye zony’) concept.

The chief objective of Russia’s domestic policies in the Arctic has been, on the one hand, addressing the negative effects of the 1990s crisis, when the federal government in essence left the AZRF to its own devices, with the result that most of the Russian Arctic fell into decline, and on the other, designing and implementing new, complex and

28

systemic, approaches to, and instruments for, implementation of the Arctic policies.

The basic documents defining the current Russia’ policy in the Arctic:

1.Russian Maritime Doctrine, released on 31 July 2022.

2.Russian president’s executive order ‘On the National Security

Strategy of the Russian Federation’, approved on 21 July 2021.

3.Fundamentals of the Russian Federation State Policy in the Arctic for the Period up to 2035, approved on 5 March 2020.

4.StrategyforDevelopingtheRussianArcticZoneandEnsuringNational Security until 2035, dated October 26, 2020.

5.Russianpresident’sexecutiveorder ‘On theDry Landof theArctic Zone of the Russian Federation’, approved on 2 May 2014.

6.PresidentialdecreeoftheRussianFederationNo.287dated2May 2017 «On amendments into the Presidential decree ‘On the Dry Land of the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation’» dated 2 May 2014.

National system of the Russian governing bodies implementing the Rus- sian Arctic Policy:

The different functions on governing of the different areas of the Arcticdevelopmentaredistributedamongtherelevantministriesanditoften leads to low efficiency of governance of the Russian Arctic and difficulty of fulfilling the tasks, which were defined in the strategic documents.

At federal level, the State Commission for the Development of the Arc- tic, with an intricate structure, was established in 2015. It is a deliberative body, which coordinates activities of federal executive bodies, executive organs of the constituents of the Russian Federation, other public bodies, organs of local self-government, and organizations to handle socio-economic and other problems concerning national security and the development of the AZRF. Besides that, the Commission’s tasks include clarifying the aims of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic in accordance with the changes in domestic and foreign policy and improving the efficiency of the AZRF’ development programs. The Commission is composed of special councils and task forces. The following task groups were established under the ae- gisoftheStateCommission:nationalsecurity,socio-economicdevelop- ment, development of education and the academe, development of the

29

transportation infrastructure, international cooperation, development of the energy sector, development of industry and technology, ensuring ecological safety and rational exploitation of natural resources and implementationofthenationalpoliciesasregardstheindigenousminorities living in the Arctic.

There has been a long debate about the importance of and need for a new governmental agency (a special ministry) that would become Russia’s chief decision-maker for the AZRF. However, the establishment of a Ministry of the Arctic has been postponed time and again, and in 2019 theMinistryfortheDevelopmentoftheFarEastwasassignedtooversee the development of the AZRF, in the structure of which additional staff andaseparatefirstdeputyministerfortheArcticwereallocated,andthe ministry itself was named the Ministry for the Development of the Far East andtheArctic.TheauthorofthisinitiativewastheformerPrimeMinister of the Russian Federation D. Medvedev, who noted that for reasons of economy of managerial and financial resources, the creation of a separate department was deemed inappropriate.

The RF’s Defense Ministry in 2014 identified its objectives in the AZRF as modernizing the troop command and control system and ramping up the RF’s military presence in the Arctic, as well as carrying out large-scale projects focused on building and improving the infrastructure in the Arctic – the infrastructure that will be instrumental in defending Russia’s national interests. Besides, the Defense Ministry was put in charge of cleaning up the Arctic territories.

The mission of Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology, meanwhile, is to reduce the negative effects on natural environment, as well as preserve natural resources in the Arctic. In pursuance of these goals,theministry’sroleistopreparelegislativeandregulatoryproposals in relation to different aspects of exploitation of natural resources and environmental protection, to ensure the region’s ecological safety.

Russia’s Foreign Affairs Ministry is in charge of the RF’s participation in international cooperation in the Arctic.

The Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministries of Transpor- tation and Energy, too, are involved in the Arctic projects, participating in the work of the State Commission’s task groups.

30