Transnational Indigenous Representative Organizations as Partial Subjects of International Law
34 Pages Posted: 16 Dec 2022
Date Written: December 2, 2022
Abstract
Russia’s dramatic escalation of the war of aggression against Ukraine since 24 February 2022 has impacted international cooperation in the Arctic. The seven other member states of the Arctic Council have paused all cooperation with Russia, which prompted the Arctic Council to declare a pause to all of its activities. At the same time is there a clear interest in the seven Western Arctic states (A7) to continue the successful cooperation that has been undertaken within the framework of the Arctic Council since its creation in 1996, just without Russia. In addition to the eight member states, the Arctic Council also includes six permanent participants, indigenous representative organizations from the Arctic, all but one of which are transnational in nature: the Aleut International Association, the Arctic Athabaskan Council, the Gwich’in Council International, the Inuit Circumpolar Council, the Saami Council and the Russian Association of the Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON). While the latter fully supports the Russian government, many of the other permanent participants have spoken out against the war of aggression and in favour of a continuation of international cooperation in the Arctic. While there is still hope among the A7 that the Arctic Council can be preserved (an aim also expressed by the White House in its October 2022 Arctic strategy document), the future of the Arctic Council remains unclear as of late November 2022. This uncertainty also includes the question of which role the five Arctic transnational indigenous representative organizations, which were at least partial subjects of international law as long as the Arctic Council was active, will play in case the Arctic Council is not reactivated. Looking at the rapid developments in the last week of February and the first two weeks of March 2022, this text aims to show the vulnerability of the legal position of indigenous representative organizations in the context of Arctic governance. The dependent position of the Arctic transnational indigenous representative organizations in Arctic governance outside of the Arctic Council does not correspond favourably to their importance in the work of the Arctic Council between 1996 and 2022. It will be shown that the fate of these entities is de facto in the hands of the A7. Politically aligning the respective positions of these organizations with those of the A7 might facilitate cooperation in the future. The Arctic is split between Russia and the West not only between the states, with the A7 opposing Russia’s fundamental rejection of international law as the cardinal organizational principle for the international governance of the Arctic but also between the six permanent participants, with RAIPON having become effectively a tool of the Russian state and the five transnational indigenous representative organizations remaining either silent on the issue or in support of the A7. The rift in Arctic governance is complete.
Keywords: Arctic, Arctic governance, governance, Arctic Council, indigenous peoples, indigenous representative organizations, Sápmi, Saami Council, Russia, Russian Federation, war, conflict, representation
JEL Classification: K33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation