Арктическая политика России. Учебное пособие

natural gas and gas condensate and the port Sabetta was opened, etc. The system of governance of the AZRF’s socioeconomic development has dramatic changes related to increasing the role of business and local communities in the implementation of political initiatives. One of the examples of such interaction is the experience of the Yamalo-Nenetsky Autonomous District where every year 50 energy giants (JSC Gazprom, JSC Novatek, French Total, etc.) sign agreements with local communities taking into account the interest of local population. In order to attractnewinvestorstotheregionandincreasetheroleofbusinessinthe AZRF, in July 2020 a federal law ‘On state support for entrepreneurship in theArcticZoneoftheRussianFederation’wasadopted,accordingtowhich Russia’sArcticbecomesaspecialeconomiczonewithawiderangeoftax benefits and non-tax preferences for business. The document also provides for measures of state support for the traditional economic activities of indigenous peoples.

In the context of economic development of the AZRF, another important issue arises, the development of infrastructure. Developing transportation infrastructure is one of the vital problems the Russian Arctic is faced with today. To begin with, the Arctic is first of all the Arctic Ocean, a system of seas and rivers, and this circumstance leads onetoprioritizemaritimetransport.TheAZRF’skeytransportationartery, the Northern Sea Route (NSR) requires serious modernization. And given that the AZRF also covers a big stretch of dry land, developing a network of railways and automobile roads is high on the agenda as well. The greatest hindrance is the absence of year-round land transportation among Arctic settlements and regions, the circumstance that practicallyisolatestheAZRF’sresidents.RestoringtheArctictransportation system in Russia in order to raise living standards of the AZRF’s residents is a matter of greatest importance today. The task of modernizing and developing the transportation system in the near future has been considered by the Russian leadership as a high strategic priority in its national Arctic policy.

The term of ‘human security’ was first proposed in 1994 in the ‘Human Development Report’ of the United Nations Human Development Program (UNDP), where the phenomenon was defined as ‘safety from

41

such chronic threats as hunger, disease and repression’ and ‘protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life-whether in homes, in jobs or in communities’. The main components of ‘human security’ were identified, including: economic security, food security, health security, environmental security, personal security, community security, and political security.

For the Russia’s Arctic, the concept of ‘human security’ is relatively new, which is because until recently the security of the Russia’s Arctic wasmainlydefinedthroughthestate-centricapproachthatwasreflected in Russia’s strategic documents.

Today, the main problems of the development of the Russian Arctic anditsnationalsecurityincludeclimatechange,populationdecline,lagging indicators of the quality of life in the Russian Arctic from national indicators, lack of high-quality infrastructure, etc., all those questions that are included in the concept of ‘human security’.

It seems possible to assert that today the problem of human security has acquired a special meaning for Russia in the context of the implementation of one of the most important tasks of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic: sustainable development of the region. The successful development of the Russian Arctic presupposes the creation of the foundation for the country’s socio-economic development, and this requires the neutralization of the challenges and threats of human security.

The successful development of the AZRF should create the foundation for an effective economic development of the country, which requires the neutralization of threats in the social sphere, with which the concept of human security is correlated.

The formation of threats to economic security in the AZRF is due to the inefficient social policy of the 1990s and early 2000s, outdated infrastructureandthelackofnecessaryinvestmentsthatintensifiedthenegative trends in the development of the Russia’s Arctic. In the 1990s many industrial facilities were shut down, public utilities in several northern cities fell in disrepair, many ports, and other civil and military facilities of the AZRF were languishing in neglect. The region experienced a high level of out-migration to Russia’s more prosperous regions, with the

42

result that the region started experiencing a labor shortage and its population became concentrated in big cities mostly in the west of the AZRF (Murmansk, Arkhangelsk, etc.). At this stage, the specific feature of the AZRFisitsheterogeneityintermsoftheleveloftheeconomicandsocial spheres development: some regions near the areas of resource extraction and processing are very well developed and urbanized, but a big part of theterritoryhasunderdevelopedeconomy,poorinfrastructureandliving standards.

Suggestions for further readings

Human Development Report. – New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. URL: http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/255/hdr_1994_en_complete_nostats.pdf.

Lagutina, M. L. The place of the concept of ‘human security’ in the strategies of the Arctic countries // SHS Web of Conferences 112, 00028. – 2021. URL: https://www.shs-conferences.org/articles/shsconf/abs/2021/23/shsconf_ nsdf2021_00028/shsconf_nsdf2021_00028.html.

Martin, J. M. R. Policies and Strategies for the Arctic: A Review of the Approaches to Human Security in the Arctic. In K., Hossain, J. M. R. Martín, A., Petrétei (eds.), Human and Societal Security in the Circumpolar Arctic. Local and Indigenous Communities. – Leiden : Brill, 2018.

Rohr, J. IWGIA Report 18: Indigenous Peoples in the Russian Federation. – Copenhagen : International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, 2014. URL: http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/0695_HumanRights_report_18_Russia.pdf.

Rozanova, M. IndigenousUrbanizationinRussia’sArctic:TheCaseofNenets Autonomous Region. Sibirica, 2019. – № 18. – P. 54–91.

Strategy for the Development of the Arctic Zone of the Russian Federation and Ensuring National Security for the Period up to 2020. – 2013. – 20 February. URL: http://government.ru/info/18360/.

Strategy for Developing the Russian Arctic Zone and Ensuring National Security until 2035, dated October 26. – 2020. URL: http://en.kremlin.ru/acts/ news/64274.

Questions for discussion

1.What are the chief drivers of socio-economic development of the AZRF?

2.What are the key migration challenges facing the AZRF?

3.What are the specific features and developmental characteristics of the Russian Arctic’s economy?

4.Why does ‘Sustainable Development’ matter in the AZRF?

43

5.Why does ‘Human Security’ matter in the AZRF?

6.Which ‘human security’ threats and challenges can be identified in the AZRF?

7.Whether the ‘human security’ concept is embedded in Russian strategy in the Arctic or not?

8.How are contemporary threats to security perceived by representatives of peoples who have been living in the Arctic for a long time?

9.To what extent can the traditional experience of indigenous peoples in ensuring ‘human security’ be in demand for the development of state policy today?

10.What do you think about the future of ‘human security’ in the AZRF?

Research task

Make a comparative analysis of the five Arctic states (Canada, Denmark,Norway,RussiaandtheUnitedStates)’strategiesfortheArcticon ‘human security’ components (table 2).

Topic 7. Strategic Military Importance of the AZRF

Abstract. The Arctic as the national border of the Russian Federation. The national policy goals in the sphere of ensuring defense and protection of the Russian Federation in the Arctic. Re-establishment of Russian military presence in the Arctic: key reasons and trends. Russia’s military and civil emergency capacity in the Arctic. Russia’s security concerns in the Arctic region. Russia and NATO in the Arctic. Security architecture in the Arctic: the impact of the crisis in Ukraine.

44

Today Russia modernizes its armed forces and restores its military presence in the Russian Arctic that corresponds to the Russia’s national interests and the security of the northern borders of Russia.

According to ‘The Fundamentals of the Russian Federation State Policy in the Arctic for the Period up to 2035’, the primary objectives for providing military security of the Russian Federation in the Arctic are:

a)implementing a set of measures aimed at preventing the use of military force against Russia, and protecting its sovereignty and territorial integrity;

b)increasing the combat capabilities of general purpose forces (troops) of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military units, and military bodies in the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation, and maintaining their combat readiness and capabilities at a level that guarantees the success of counter-measures against any aggression towards the Russian Federation and its allies;

c)improving the system of integrated control over air, surface, and underwater activities in the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation;

d)construction and modernization of military infrastructure facilities, ensuring the operability of general purpose forces (troops) of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, other troops, military formations, and agencies.

TheRussianArcticwastraditionallyincludedintotheareaofrespon- sibilityoffourmilitarycommandregions:Leningrad,Volga-Urals,Sibe- rian and Far Eastern Military Districts.

In 2010 the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev reformed the system of troop command and control which resulted in thesystemwherethesecurityoftheRussianArcticwasputintothecommand of the Western, Central and Eastern Military Districts.

In April 2014 President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin structed the Ministry of Defense to create in the Arctic an integrated system of deploying new-generation surface crafts and submarines, reinforce the national border and establish a new government body for implementation of the Russian Federation policy in this strategically important region. At the end of the same year such government body

45

was created: the Sever (North) Unified Strategic Command, sometimes dubbed Arctic Troops, with its headquarters in Severomorsk. This administrative unit of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation is intended for integrated provision of the Russian Arctic security, defense and unified management of military assets in the zone between Murmansk and Anadyr. The Unified Strategic Command consists of surface and underwater forces, marine aviation, coastal defense troops, and air defense forces. The Northern Fleet is the basis of the Arctic Troops and it represents their overall military leadership. An important task of the new Command is protection of the economic interests of Russia in the Arctic and assurance of safe commercial shipping along the Northern Sea Route.

The re-establishment of Russian military presence in the Arctic has become one of the relevant tasks for a number of objective reasons. Firstly, 20 thousand kilometers of the national border of the Russian Federation pass through the Arctic region. There is a growing interest in the Arctic from the world community and Russia cannot ignore it in its plans of development of this region, including the sphere of security. Secondly, Russia explains the importance of re-establishment of its military presence in the Arctic by economic reasons: ensuring security of natural deposits’ development, exploitation of natural resources, and shipping along the Northern Sea Route. And, thirdly, the Russian military are involved in the provision of environmental security of the region:preservationofbiologicalresourcesoftheArcticandatthesame time removal of waste accumulated during the Soviet time. Through intensifying efforts of ensuring its military presence in the Arctic, Russia safeguards security of its national borders and its legitimate interests in the sphere of Arctic development. It should be noted that the Russian programs of military modernization and increased military presence in the Arctic zone are defensively oriented.

Suggestions for further readings

Devyatkin, P. Russia’s Arctic Strategy: Military and Security. Part II. The Arctic Institute. – 2018. – February 13. URL: https://www.thearcticinstitute. org/russias-arctic-military-and-security-part-two/.

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.

46

windows.net/portals/0/NWCDepartments/Russia%20Maritime%20Studies%20Institute/ArcticPolicyFoundations2035_English_FINAL_21July2020. pdf?sr=b&si=DNNFileManagerPolicy&sig=DSkBpDNhHsgjOAvPILTRoxIfV%2FO02gR81NJSokwx2EM%3D.

Gubin,A.MilitaryAspectsofRussia’sStanceintheArctic//RIAC.–2022.– September 23. URL: https://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/ analytics/military-aspects-of-russia-s-stance-in-the-arctic/.

Klimenko,E.Russia’sArcticSecurityPolicy:StillQuietintheHighNorth?// SIPRI.–2016.–February.URL:https://www.sipri.org/publications/2016/sip- ri-policy-papers/russias-arctic-security-policy-still-quiet-high-north.

Lackenbauer, P. W. and Sergunin A. Canada’s and Russia’s Security and Defence Strategies in the Arctic: A Comparative Analysis // Arctic Review on Law and Politics. – 2022. – Vol. 13. – P. 232–257.

Sergunin A. and Konyshev V. Russian Military Activities in the Arctic: Myths and Realities. – 2015. URL: https://www.arcticyearbook.com/commentar- ies2015/156-russian-military-activities-in-the-arctic-myths-realities.

Sukhankin, S. Russia and the Arctic in an Era of Strategic Competition: Selected Writings. – Trent University : Peterborough, Ontario, Canada, 2021.

Questions for discussion

1.What are the national policy goals in the sphere of ensuring defense and protection of the Russian Federation in the Arctic?

2.What are the key reasons of re-establishment of Russian military presence in the Arctic?

3.What are Russia’s security concerns in the Arctic region today?

4.What is the difference between ‘securitization’ and ‘militarization’?

5.Does the idea of ‘militarization’ of the Arctic make sense?

6.Is rivalry and tension between NATO and Russia in the Arctic today?

7.What is the impact of the Ukrainian crisis on security architecture in the Arctic?

8.What consequences might a military confrontation between Arctic countries have for the Arctic?

9.Is there a possibility of military confrontation in the region involving non-Arctic countries?

Research task

Pro et Contra: Is there a threat of military conflict in the Arctic?

The students will work in 2 groups: ‘Pro’ and ‘Contra’.

1. Group A discusses and gives the list of the arguments for the possibility of military conflict in the Arctic.

47

GroupBdiscussesandgivesthelistoftheargumentsagainstthepossibility of military conflict in the Arctic.

2.Class discussion.

3.Reflection & questions.

P a r t 3

THE ARCTIC IN RUSSIA’S FOREIGN POLICY

Topic 8. The Arctic in the Russia’s

Foreign Policy. Multilateral cooperation

Abstract. The goals of the state Arctic policy of Russia in the sphere of international cooperation. The main motivations for Russia’s active policy in the Arctic at the present stage. The ‘Arctic component’ in the Concept of the RF’s Foreign Policy (2008, 2013, 2016). The priorities of the Russian foreign policy in the Arctic. Russia’s participation in international regional organizations: the Arctic Council, the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC), the Arctic Economic Council, Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (CPAR), etc. The Russian Chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2021–2023.

The current policy of Russia in the Arctic is based mainly on its historical experience and achievements of the past that gives grounds to talk about the continuity in the Arctic state policy of Russia. The main motivations for Russia’s active policy in the Arctic today are:

1)Russia has a unique historical experience developing northern territories;

2)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;

3)20 thousand kilometers of the national border of the Russian Federation passes through the Arctic region;

4)the largest number of the Arctic population lives in the AZRF: approximately 2,5 million people live in the AZRF which is roughly half of the Arctic’s entire population;

48

5)the AZRF is extremely rich with resources, and having great transit and military meaning are considered the most important drivers of strengthening the economic and geopolitical positions of the country;

6)Russia is actively developing the economy of the Arctic territories: 10 % of Russia’s GDP and 20 % of Russia’s exports are currently produced in the Arctic, etc.

Thus, for Russia, the Arctic is not some distant territory with a harsh climate and difficult living conditions, but a fully integrated part of the state territory, the governance of which is an essential component of modern Russia’s policy.

The‘Fundamentals-2020’repeattheideaofthenecessity‘topreserve the Arctic as a territory of peace and stable mutually beneficial partnership’. Nowadays Russia is an active participant of international cooperationintheArctic,whichisreflectedinitsforeignpolicyandfixedboth in ‘Fundamentals-2020’ and the ‘Concept of Russia’s Foreign Policy – 2016’. Based on the analysis of these documents the following priorities of Russian foreign policy in the Arctic can be identified:

– development and enhancement of the Russian position in the Arctic, protection of the Russian national interests in the region and its state borders;

– substantiation and collection of evidence proving that the Arctic shelf goes beyond the 200-mile zone;

– assurance of sustainable development, in this respect Russia calls for strengthening of the cooperation within the Arctic Council format, the Arctic Five and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council;

– prevention of politicization and militarization of Arctic international cooperation;

– usage of the Northern Sea Route for transit transportation between Europe and Asia.

Accordingtothe‘Fundamentals-2020’themaingoalofthestateArc- tic policy of Russia in the sphere of international cooperation is defined as ‘strengthening good-neighborly relations with the Arctic states on a bilateral basis and within the framework of multilateral regional cooperation formats’.

49

Russia is a participant of the most international organizations in the Arctic: the Arctic Council, the Arctic Economic Council, Conference of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region (CPAR), the Barents Euro-Arctic Region, etc.

According to the ‘Fundamentals-2020’ Russia sees the Arctic Coun- cil as ‘a key regional association coordinating international activities in the region’. In Russia there is a supervisory body for the Arctic Council programs,itconsistsoftheresponsiblefederalagencies:theRussianMinistry of Economic Development, the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources, the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations, and the Russian Meteorological Service (Roshydromet). They are respectively performing the function of leading agencies in participation in specific working groups of the Arctic Council and its programs. In this respect the Ministry of Economic Development coordinates participation in the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group; the Ministry of NaturalResourcesintheConservationofArcticFloraandFaunaWorking Group, the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group, and the Steering Committee of the Action Plan to Eliminate Pollution in the Arctic; the Ministry of Emergency Situations chairs the WorkingGrouponPreventionandEliminationofEmergencySituations in the Arctic; and, finally, the Roshydromet is actively engaged in the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Working Group.

The Russian Federation chaired the Arctic Council in the period of 2004–2006 and 2021–2023. In line with the goals and objectives defined in the ‘Fundamentals-2020’, the highest priority during the Russian Chairmanship of the AC is given to the socioeconomic agenda with an emphasis on the ‘human dimension’ of international cooperation in the Arctic. There is continuity in the priorities of the first and second RussianChairmanshipsoftheAC:sustainabledevelopmentoftheregion with an emphasis on social and economic development.

The Arctic Economic Council (AEC) operation is very significant in linewiththeRussianpriorityofsocialandeconomicdevelopmentofthe AZRF. For many years Russian diplomats repeatedly suggested establishment of a special body for dealing with economic issues in the Arctic, although the Arctic Economic Council was established during the

50