| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
178618
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Article 234 is exceptional regarding its wording and placement in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), as well as in its historical background. The Arctic provision has given rise to divergent interpretations regarding the conditions for invoking it, the limitations on the authority under Article 234, and its spatial scope of application. It has served as a justification for specific legislation adopted by Canada and Russia that has been opposed by the United States. The article, describes as a “textbook example of finding a compromise in international treaty negotiations,” was negotiated directly and privately, among these three states during the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III). This article describes the historical background to Article 234 and sheds new light on the negotiating process that led to the adoption of the provision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
188489
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
AFTER nearly three decades of constructive cooperation in the Arctic between Russia and NATO member states, the region is returning to the era of tough confrontation. NATO's leading countries have a growing irrepressible desire to dominate the entire Arctic as increasingly rapid ice melt in the region caused by global climate change makes its seas more navigable and opens new opportunities for tapping its rich natural resources. In pursuit of this goal, NATO countries are ramping up their military activity and offensive potential, creating a major threat to Russian interests in the region, the lion's share of which is under Russian sovereignty, as even Western experts acknowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|