Russia claimed north pole

[Autumn Child]

What do you guys think about russia claiming the north pole?

Is it legal?
Why now when submersible tech is available decades ago?

Canada and other countries around the arctic circle denounced the move. Will this action contribute to growing tension with NATO?

[Norfolk]

It certainly can't help relations between Russia and NATO. I don't see a direct threat to NATO, nor is any intended I believe, but with Russia claiming as effectively territorial waters beyond the 12 mile teritorial limit and the 200 mile economic limit to include the continental shelf, and therefore, practically half of the Arctic Ocean, such a bold claim and any subsequent efforts to enforce it are going to cause tensions.

Personally, as long as Russia doesn't become aggressive outside of the areas it is laying claim to, I am not seriously concerned, although still somewhat wary. The US will not take this lying down, and I suspect Norway and Denmark will take whatever measures they find they are capable of to preserve their own claims. Canada apparently is going to build a new base at Resolute on Cornwallis Island, in the middle of the North-West Passage, the right place for it, but it appears that it will feature little in the way of a meaningful military presence, probably just a glorified token presence.

[Ryz05]

What do you guys think about russia claiming the north pole?

Is it legal?
Why now when submersible tech is available decades ago?

Canada and other countries around the arctic circle denounced the move. Will this action contribute to growing tension with NATO?

It is legal, but not official. No country has recognized Russia's claim. In any case, future oil exploration in the area will most likely be a joint effort involving multiple nations, and I don't think Russia will want a war over the North Pole. Tension? No, unless Russia plants a military base there.

[AssassinsMace]

The US claims space as their domain. Or like the guy who's selling property on the moon, Mars, and other planets. There's is a loophole in the UN charter about that but can he claim land he's never been to himself?

[Gollevainen]

The claim has its legimacy in the international martime law, and US and Canada can IMO stop whining. Wheter it gives Russians advantage or not, is another thing, but no law, expecially international one shouldn't be bypassed by simple national chauvinism.

The flag thing critisism by US, is BS and hyppocracy in its biggest form, Its bit bigger thing to plant that into face of the moon than in some mirky arctic depths.

And dont forget that the MIR-submersibles that made the whole thing possiple are..krhm....finnish desing and build;)

[Jeff Head]

The claim has its legimacy in the international martime law, and US and Canada can IMO stop whining. Wheter it gives Russians advantage or not, is another thing, but no law, expecially international one shouldn't be bypassed by simple national chauvinism.

The flag thing critisism by US, is BS and hyppocracy in its biggest form, Its bit bigger thing to plant that into face of the moon than in some mirky arctic depths.

And dont forget that the MIR-submersibles that made the whole thing possiple are..krhm....finnish desing and build;)I do not believe the claim has any legitmacy in terms of claiming the territoy as their own soveriegn territory. It is just posturing by Putin and an effort to try and help secure more natural resources for mother Russia (which is understandable) though he knows the territorial claim will not be recognized or honored. I expect nothing to come of it.

...and trying to compare it to the landing on the moon is a little off base, IMHO. Planting a flag at the landing site does not mean claiming it as soveriegn US territory. The US has never attempted to or implied that it officially claims the moon...or space for that matter...as opposed to this "official" claim by Russia.

The plaque on Apollo 11's lander actually states the following:

"Here men from the planet earth first set foot on the moon, July 1969, A.D. We came in peace for all mankid."

A picture of the entire globe is displayed. The United States is not even mentioned other than in the title of the President, who also signed the plaque.

Anyhow, I see this claim to the North Pole as more for internal political consumption than anything else.

Last year the US was at the Pole with this show of military presence...no claims were made however...just a low key message.

Click the thumbnail for a larger pic:

http://www.jeffhead.com/usnavyfavoritepics/2007/la%20north%20pole-thumb.jpg (http://www.jeffhead.com/usnavyfavoritepics/2007/la%20north%20pole.jpg)

[SampanViking]

The claim is certianly legitimate in so far that Russia certainly has the right to make it.

There are protocols about ownership of the Continental shelf and it all hinges on whether the land is contiguous (ie directly connected to the Russian Continental shelf) If so, then the claim is valid. This is why the confirmation about the existance and full conectivity of this new ridge is paramount.

There is a UN committe that meet irregularly to consider aspects of Arctic territorial claims and protocols as and when such questions arise and it is due to sit in 2009 in order to consider the Russain claim.

The reason why this has become an issue now is that warmer climatic conditions have enabled nations to send their ships and surveyors into the region to prospect for resources and to try to establish links to expand their territory in the Arctic.

Rest assured that the US, Canada, Denmark and Norway are all looking in their patch as well.

[FuManChu]

I think the claim is also questionable. Normally when one claims territory, it has to be land. The Arctic isn't land, it's frozen water - as far as I know that doesn't qualify. Besides people have already put flags up on the North Pole.

As to below the North Pole, I don't think you can claim a seabed. Every country gets its EEZ, but that's pretty much it. EEZs can be disputed, but dropping flags won't change much.

To be quite honest I think it's a waste of time. I doubt very much the committee that regulates this area of the world will be influenced by it, so it is pretty much a PR exercise - which is only going to annoy other countries. Indeed I wonder if Russia knows this and did it anyway. Sort of a "look at me - we can do what we like" routine. Ironic given Russia is all for accusing other countries of "causing trouble".

[SampanViking]

If the ridge link is proven, then in accordance with the protocols the claim is valid and will be recognised under International Law.

All the Arctic bordering nations were in favour of these conditions when they were agreed during the 50's. Nobody wanted to pass up the prospect of a future bonanza. I guess nobody anticipated that the opportunity would come sooner rather than later.

[Jeff Head]

The claim is certianly legitimate in so far that Russia certainly has the right to make it.

There are protocols about ownership of the Continental shelf and it all hinges on whether the land is contiguous (ie directly connected to the Russian Continental shelf) If so, then the claim is valid. This is why the confirmation about the existance and full conectivity of this new ridge is paramount..But this pre-supposs that it is a land mass we are talking about. It is not. It is a frozen part of the Arctic Ocean. That is why I said that it is not legitimate as far as their claiming it to be part of their soverign territory. If you allow this...where does it stop? Claiming open ocean sea-lanes?

As I said, I expect not too much to come of it. The Russians know this...but it makes for good political consumption for the voters and party mechanisms.

[Gollevainen]

I dont think the russian flag posture is an attempt to make the continental self claim as pararrel to claim land, but mere propaganda act (there are ellections comming), wich has been inturpted as such by the traditionally anti-russian western media.

[Jeff Head]

I dont think the russian flag posture is an attempt to make the continental self claim as pararrel to claim land, but mere propaganda act (there are ellections comming), wich has been inturpted as such by the traditionally anti-russian western media.I agree 100%. Political posturing to help out in the next elections. Sort of a "We spit in the West's eye", kind of move to show that the Putin administration is "strong" and "resolute" to its electorate.

[SampanViking]

But this pre-supposs that it is a land mass we are talking about. It is not. It is a frozen part of the Arctic Ocean. That is why I said that it is not legitimate as far as their claiming it to be part of their soverign territory. If you allow this...where does it stop? Claiming open ocean sea-lanes?

As I said, I expect not too much to come of it. The Russians know this...but it makes for good political consumption for the voters and party mechanisms.

No Jeff, these protocols are specific to the Arctic, just as Specific protocols exist for the Antarctic. If the ridge link is proved, then the territory is Russian in accordance with agreements that all the Arctic bordering nations have signed and which the UN has ratified.

[Jeff Head]

No Jeff, these protocols are specific to the Arctic, just as Specific protocols exist for the Antarctic. If the ridge link is proved, then the territory is Russian in accordance with agreements that all the Arctic bordering nations have signed and which the UN has ratified.Do you have a link to the specific language? I am very suspicious that the US would agree to such protocols...the precedent could be devestating in other areas once it was established.

Reading up on it myself, apparently, under international law, no country owns the North Pole. Instead, the five surrounding Arctic states, Russia, the US, Canada, Norway and Denmark (via Greenland), are limited to a 200-mile economic zone around their coasts.

According to Russia's they now have announced the "sensational news" that the Lomonosov ridge was linked to Russian Federation territory, boosting Russia's claim over the oil-and-gas rich triangle. The territory contained 10bn tonnes of gas and oil deposits, the scientists said.

Russia's Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper celebrated the discovery by printing a large map of the North Pole. It showed the new "addition" to Russia - the size of France, Germany and Italy combined - under a white, blue and red Russian flag.

Many scientists doubt whether Russia's latest Arctic grab stood up to scrutiny.

To extend a zone, a state has to prove that the structure of the continental shelf is similar to the geological structure within its territory. Under the current UN convention on the laws of the sea, no country's shelf extends to the North Pole. Instead, the International Seabed Authority administers the area around the pole as an international area.

"Frankly I think it's a little bit strange," Sergey Priamikov, the international co-operation director of Russia's Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute in St Petersburg, told the Guardian. "Canada could make exactly the same claim. The Canadians could say that the Lomonosov ridge is part of the Canadian shelf, which means Russia should in fact belong to Canada, together with the whole of Eurasia."

I do not think it will stand the light of day. Again, IMHO, it is a political effort...and also one to help bolster more claims for them to the resources. No chance anyone will recognize any Russian soveriegnty there.

[Vlad Plasmius]

I don't take it all that seriously honestly, especially when they say stuff like this:

It's like putting a flag on the moon.

Source: USA Today (http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2007/08/russian-subs-re.html)

I think the whole idea of claiming the North Pole is just ridiculous.

[planeman]

It's bloody cold up there, I don't get it. Why not claim Denmark instead, at least it's a bit warmer?

[Troika]

But this pre-supposs that it is a land mass we are talking about. It is not. It is a frozen part of the Arctic Ocean. That is why I said that it is not legitimate as far as their claiming it to be part of their soverign territory. If you allow this...where does it stop? Claiming open ocean sea-lanes?

As I said, I expect not too much to come of it. The Russians know this...but it makes for good political consumption for the voters and party mechanisms.

No it doesn't. Continental shelf claims are legitimate under international maritime law, though less in use these days. And the claim is to the part of the Arctic Ocean being not sovereign territory as you keep claiming, but territorial waters, a very different animal, and that is why your concerns about claiming sea lanes is unfounded - they are subjected to certain limitations such as innocent passage.

And in answer to later question poised - this is all very serious, and Canada and Denmark have made competing claims based on the ridge features such as Lomonosov Ridge and Mendeleev Ridge are extention of their continental shelves.

You are correct, however, that the flag is a gesture of the claim, and carries little to no weight in and of itself (we can't go and plant a flag in the Marianas Trench and expect that to be legitimate), the strength lies in the claim itself. There certainly is a domestic political dimension, and probably has an eye on elections - but expedition itself had been in planning for some time, and suggested even earlier. United Russia is so strong anyway such tricks really aren't necessary.

It could have something to do with Chilingarov himself, though. :D


It's bloody cold up there, I don't get it. Why not claim Denmark instead, at least it's a bit warmer?

Love to, but it's already claimed. :(

By some nation called Denmark, apparently.

[adeptitus]

As for as I know, unlike the South Pole, there is no "land" in the North Pole, just ice. Russia is planting her flag on the sea floor and not on floating piece of ice, which might eventually melt if you believe in global warming.

Anyways... Russia extending is territorial claim based on continental shelf extensions isn't that much different than, say, China's own territorial claims.

[Jeff Head]

No it doesn't. Continental shelf claims are legitimate under international maritime law, though less in use these days. And the claim is to the part of the Arctic Ocean being not sovereign territory as you keep claiming, but territorial waters, a very different animal, and that is why your concerns about claiming sea lanes is unfounded - they are subjected to certain limitations such as innocent passage.

And in answer to later question poised - this is all very serious, and Canada and Denmark have made competing claims based on the ridge features such as Lomonosov Ridge and Mendeleev Ridge are extention of their continental shelves.

You are correct, however, that the flag is a gesture of the claim, and carries little to no weight in and of itself (we can't go and plant a flag in the Marianas Trench and expect that to be legitimate), the strength lies in the claim itself. There certainly is a domestic political dimension, and probably has an eye on elections - but expedition itself had been in planning for some time, and suggested even earlier.As I said in a later post, having read up on it somewhat now myself, apparently, under international law, no country owns the North Pole. Instead, the five surrounding Arctic states, Russia, the US, Canada, Norway and Denmark (via Greenland), are limited to a 200-mile economic zone around their coasts.

According to Russia, they now have announced the "sensational news" that the Lomonosov ridge was linked to Russian Federation territory, boosting Russia's claim over the oil-and-gas rich triangle. The territory contains 10bn tonnes of gas and oil deposits, the scientists said.

Russia's Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper celebrated the discovery by printing a large map of the North Pole. It showed the new "addition" to Russia - the size of France, Germany and Italy combined - under a white, blue and red Russian flag.

Many scientists doubt whether Russia's latest Arctic grab will stand up to scrutiny...and I do too.

To extend a zone, a state has to prove that the structure of the continental shelf is similar to the geological structure within its territory. Under the current UN convention on the laws of the sea, no country's shelf extends to the North Pole. Instead, the International Seabed Authority administers the area around the pole as an international area.

"Frankly I think it's a little bit strange," Sergey Priamikov, the international co-operation director of Russia's Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute in St Petersburg, told the Guardian. "Canada could make exactly the same claim. The Canadians could say that the Lomonosov ridge is part of the Canadian shelf, which means Russia should in fact belong to Canada, together with the whole of Eurasia."

I do not think it will stand the light of day. Again, IMHO, it is a political effort...and just a round about way to bolster more Russian claims to the resources.

[planeman]

We could give Belgium o the Russians as trade for this territory? It sounds like a fair swap to me.

[Troika]

As I said in a later post, having read up on it somewhat now myself, apparently, under international law, no country owns the North Pole. Instead, the five surrounding Arctic states, Russia, the US, Canada, Norway and Denmark (via Greenland), are limited to a 200-mile economic zone around their coasts.

According to Russia, they now have announced the "sensational news" that the Lomonosov ridge was linked to Russian Federation territory, boosting Russia's claim over the oil-and-gas rich triangle. The territory contains 10bn tonnes of gas and oil deposits, the scientists said.

Russia's Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper celebrated the discovery by printing a large map of the North Pole. It showed the new "addition" to Russia - the size of France, Germany and Italy combined - under a white, blue and red Russian flag.

Many scientists doubt whether Russia's latest Arctic grab will stand up to scrutiny...and I do too.

To extend a zone, a state has to prove that the structure of the continental shelf is similar to the geological structure within its territory. Under the current UN convention on the laws of the sea, no country's shelf extends to the North Pole. Instead, the International Seabed Authority administers the area around the pole as an international area.

"Frankly I think it's a little bit strange," Sergey Priamikov, the international co-operation director of Russia's Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute in St Petersburg, told the Guardian. "Canada could make exactly the same claim. The Canadians could say that the Lomonosov ridge is part of the Canadian shelf, which means Russia should in fact belong to Canada, together with the whole of Eurasia."

I do not think it will stand the light of day. Again, IMHO, it is a political effort...and just a round about way to bolster more Russian claims to the resources.


I don't think you read what I wrote, instead repeating what you wrote.

You are correct in stating that the seabed is currently owned by no one, and administered (such as that term has any meaning for frozen hell under freezing water) by the international seabed authority, but there are provisions for claiming it if seabed geological features were to support it.

That is why after 2001 claim of Lomonosov Ridge, Russia was told to provide more evidence that it is extension of Russian continental shelf, as opposed to, that it is not valid whether the Ridge is an extension of continental shelf or not. That is also why Denmark and Canada provided contradictory claim that certain ridge features are extension of Canadian and Greenlander continental shelf respectively. There would be none of this hullabaloo if the agreement does not lend credence to this interpretation.

Priamikov is partially correct. The Canadians can and did claim that Lomonosov Ridge is an extension of their continental shelf as opposed to Eurasian one, and if their claim were to prove stronger under impartial objective geological study, then they would indeed have stronger claim. What he said afterwards, makes no sense. Russia, and the rest of Eurasia, already has prior claims, and all of it is official recognized territory of one state or another, a state of affairs that is not true of Arctic and present Russian claims.

The flag-planting itself is, however, just a gesture and has no impact on the claim itself, so in that sense we are in agreement.

[Norfolk]

We could give Belgium o the Russians as trade for this territory? It sounds like a fair swap to me.

Unless you're Belgian.

Right now, the controversy over Russia's claims to the continental shelf is largely academic, but the claims themselves may not be so academic in the future. Their present utility may have more of a PR element than anything else, but given that Russia's attempts to climb back to great power status are being financed by petroleum and gas receipts, and the 7- or 8-year, $192 billion rearmament program the Russian government has embarked upon (with 6 50,000 ton nuke carriers, amongst other things) means Russia not only has to squeeze every red cent that it can out of existing reserves, but secure as much in the way of future reserves as it possibly can.

The Russians are claiming that "their" new "territories" under the Arctic Ocean contain ~80% of the petroleum deposits in that ocean. They may be looking for PR value now, but they are also looking for future sources of income to sustain their return to great power status. The Russians are very serious about this, and it would be ill-advised to dismiss this as a simple stunt. This could cause real grief in coming decades if things aren't handled just right.