International Law Path To Solve The Arctic Problem

With global warming, the arctic climate has changed, and glaciers melted, this change makes the mineral resources of the arctic seabed area floating to the ocean surface and makes the opening up of the Northeast Passage and Northwest Passage possible. All of which had some effect on world political and economy situation. From the existing situation in terms of resources and navigation, the two aspects undoubtedly have enormous economic benefit. Because the economy decides politics, the resulting territory disputes have become increasingly prominent. Whether the climate change or territorial dispute or resource development in varying degrees have a serious impact on the ecological environment of the arctic. These issues are currently the most serious challenge for the arctic.There is no formal and binding authority and a complete set of arctic legal system in this area at present, international law still has more practical basis. In this paper, using one of the Arctic country-Norway as an example, through the case analysis on its territorial and border conflicts with the United Kingdom, Denmark, Russia and other countries, trying to integrate the theories of the international law into the process of the arctic conflict resolution. In particular, the resolution of border between Russia and Norway as long as40years in2010set a good example for this region. Of course, the marine law is not the only solution. International treaties and multilateral treaties and bilateral treaties also play a constrained role of the Alley, but the treaty itself belongs to the public international law. Therefore, the theoretical and practical significance in terms of international law in the arctic problem solving process should play its pivotal role. Each state should maintain the interests of the coastal state law of the sea in the arctic under the promise and fair to protect the interest of other countries not violated, developing and governing the arctic reasonably and lawfully. In addition, the solution to the problem of the Antarctic can provide a reference for the Arctic. Particularly, the restrictive provisions of territorial integrity and sovereignty on the Antarctic Treaty laid the foundation for the solution to the Antarctica. Arctic territory and territorial waters and exclusive economic zone are the root of all problems. Therefore, a reasonable solution to this problem is the key to the arctic disputes. It is suggested to establish an Arctic Charter (or Arctic Treaty) with similar nature of the Antarctic Treaty, freezing on all coastal states in the arctic continental shelf beyond200-nautical-mile territorial sovereignty apply and building an ’arctic treaty system’ involving all the files of all aspects of arctic issues and standardization of laws which can really play the role of management, constraints and supervision.The arctic council as the only one of more formal regional intergovernmental international organization is not perfect and incomplete on establishment and management. The first is the organization is lack of binding on member states and the observer’s privilege is weak. Especially after the introduction of the2011Senior Official Report, the provision of ad hoc observers is abolished, instead, a high threshold for the application of formal observer was established, forming a political monopoly within the arctic council. There are two points of view on non-arctic countries’ transaction on arctic affair within arctic area for a long time, one is the United States as a representative of ’special interest’ and the other one is the European Union as representative of ’share interest’. As a distant country, Although China’s participation in the Arctic is not far better than Untied States and European Union, not completely avoiding it. As one of the largest developing countries, China is expected to take on big responsibility of state, co-operate with other countries to promote the sustainable development of the Arctic region.