Could India be an Arctic Nation? Maybe!
Global warming and climate change are transforming the Arctic region. These changes and transformations have geopolitical consequences. Border and continental shelf disputes in the Arctic on the status of the North-West Passage, demands for more independence from the Inuit in Canada and Greenland, Chinese engagement in infrastructure building are just some of the issues raising eyebrows and making to the newspaper headlines. In recent years, an extremely important geopolitical interest in the Arctic has grown, especially among the Arctic states, which is: natural resources — such as oil, gas. By 2020, the North-west passage crossing Canada’s Arctic Ocean could become open to shipping on regular basis which would shorten the distance between East Asia and Western Europe from 24,000 km to 13,600 km, while same journey via Russian Arctic will be even shorter which will be reduced to 12,800 km, thus reducing transit time by 10–15 days. The opening of this new maritime route offers tremendous economic and strategic military opportunities for India and China.
Who owns the Arctic?
It is important to first understand the politics and main actors who define the Arctic. The first question arises- Who owns the Arctic, its natural resources and the shipping lanes? Even though the world is an open space but unlike Antarctica, which is protected under the Antarctic Treaty, Article 1 of which provides that Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only (Art. I), Arctic is claimed by the coastal states in the Arctic Ocean.
According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Art. 76, the default length of the continental shelf is a minimum of 200 nautical miles from the coastal state’s baselines. Continental shelf up to 350 nautical miles from its baselines can be claimed by coastal states and the Arctic coastal states have made these claims, some of which overlap.
So the answer is ‘Nobody owns the Arctic or the North Pole. According to UNCLOS, a coastal state can only claim exclusive rights to the resources on or below the seabed of their claimed continental shelf.
Who are the Arctic Actors?
Consisting of eight member Arctic member states namely Canada, The Kingdom of Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russian Federation, Sweden, United States of America, Arctic Council was established in 1996 Ottawa Declaration, to promote cooperation, coordination, and interaction among the Arctic States, with the involvement of the Arctic Indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on issues such as sustainable development and environmental protection.
An exclusive group which began a trend of self-imposed exclusion of AC from the extra-Arctic world, the trend has shifted in the recent council meetings.
New State Actors
At the 8th biannual ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council (AC) held on 15th May, 2013 at Kiruna, Sweden, two important decisions were made, that will have a lasting impact on the future of Arctic. First, was to grant several extra-Arctic players-China, India, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, and conditionally the EU-the status of permanent observers.
This decision legitimized the new stakeholders in Arctic affairs and ended the monopoly of the Arctic countries in the Arctic affairs thereby shifting the trend of exclusivity. Second, to ‘recognize the central role of business in the development of the Arctic, and decide to increase cooperation and interaction with the business community to advance sustainable development of the Arctic’. Perhaps this signalled towards opening the region to globalisation and thus attracting increased attention and participation from the biggest and fastest growing economies.
Permanent Participants (PPs)?
Besides state and non-state actors there are Permanent Participants, i.e. organizations that represent indigenous peoples in the Arctic Council; the six PPs are -
Aleut International Association (AIA)
Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC)
Gwich’in Council International (GCI)
Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC)
Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and Far East (RAIPON),
Saami Council (SC)
The case of Greenland
Located between the Arctic Ocean and the North Atlantic Ocean, northeast of Canada and northwest of Iceland, Greenland comprises of the island of Greenland — the largest island in the world — and more than a hundred other smaller islands, no land boundaries , 44,087 km of coastline and possesses the world’s second largest ice sheet.
Despite being the largest island in the world, Greenland is home to a population of just 56,500 people who are confined to settlements along the coasts, with 75% of territory covered in ice. Greenland’s geopolitical identity and significance extends further than its borders — with its harsh climate and relative inaccessibility, it is closely tied with geopolitics of the entire Arctic region.
In a globalized world system where markets, technologies and interests play together, global flows which can be utilized by local actors in Nuuk have to be managed and influenced in Beijing and Washington. Greenland is thus regarding climate change as an opportunity to create wealth and thereby gain independence from Denmark.
The US Geological Survey estimates that oil reserves off Greenland alone are as big as those in the North Sea; therefore, there is no surprise at the interest expressed by the Americans for a stake in the Arctic. However, Greenland remains an autonomous Danish dependent territory, still under Danish rule, with limited self-government.
With a tiny population that only see sunlight for two months in a year, Greenland’s majority Eskimo population remain relatively separated from the rest of the world, and even if in the future Greenland’s resources are extracted by foreign entities, whether or not this would benefit its native population is uncertain.
China in Arctic (Greenland):
Greenland is just after China, with the biggest deposits of rare earth metals that are essential to manufacture smartphones and personal computers. Its uranium resources, should they be mined, could put the arctic country among the top exporters of the elements. The list of natural resources include Rare-earth elements mining, for which China accounts 95 percent of the world’s current supply.
An article in China Economic Review (February 2014) quotes; “the country(Greenland) has oil, an estimated 32 billion barrels worth, which could put it among major producing nations such as Nigeria and Kazakhstan, although the reserves have not been commercially proven yet. More than half of the island has yet to be explored.”
But all these resources cannot be exploited without building the necessary infrastructure. Greenland doesn’t have roads, strategic ports, infrastructure or human resources needed to mine and exploit these resources. Chinese mining outfits, construction companies and state banks see an opportunity here.
The widely popular China’s $900 billion New Silk Road (Belt and Road Action Plan) has only added to the legitimacy of China’s participation in infrastructure building in the Arctic which will include land routes (the “Belt”) and maritime routes (the “Road”) with the goal of improving trade relationships in the Eurasian region primarily through infrastructure investment.
Kai Holst Andersen, Greenland’s deputy foreign minister, shared at the Shanghai’s Polar Research Institute that with a population of 56,000, the biggest challenge for Greenland is absence of infrastructure. There is no road between two cities, no ports in the places where the mines need to be, and the country lacks the number of skilled population in many of the places where mines need to be constructed.
Greenland thus plans to pass the Large- Scale Projects Bill, to open its doors to foreign labor which could, boost its total population by more than 5% with foreign workers. This poses a demographic challenges for a country that has till now protected its single majority of indigenous people from external influences.
The case of Russia-Lomonosov Ridge a part of Russian Territory
Russia is the most important player in the arctic, with significant economic, security and governance interests in the region. This is primarily because of natural resources. Over 20 percent of undiscovered global hydrocarbon reserves are located in the Arctic area and most of them in the Russian Arctic. These natural resources are key to Russian national security and economy; oil and gas alone account for roughly 16 percent of Russian GDP in 2012.
Despite being the most important player, Russia disputes 1.2 million square kilometers, including parts of the Lomonosov Ridge, which it claims as part of its Arctic territory, which U.S. and Canada also claim as their territory. Lomonosov ridge is considered important owing to its huge untapped mineral resources.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea signed in 1982, states that the continental shelf of any coastal state would include the seabed and mineral deposits beyond territorial waters and is defined as the natural extension of the land territory to the underwater continental margins outer edge. Thus, if a state proves that the shelf is part of its respective continental plate, then, according to clauses 4–7 of the convention, it can expand the boundaries of its maritime territories. This clause provoked a competition between the polar states for a desirable slice of the Arctic. However, the situation was complicated by the absence of generally recognized research data on the origin and essence of underwater ridges and elevated areas.
In 2008–2009, the United States and Canada conducted joint shelf research in the region, doing their best to prove that the ridge is part of the North American continental plate. The scope of a possible conflict between U.S, Canada on one side and Russia on the other has a high probability.
However, the UN has the right to grant international status to the disputed territories, allowing various countries, including non-polar states, to develop it, in case the dispute continues. Therefore efforts to hammer out a treaty on the Lomonosov Ridge are a high-priority for the Arctic states.
India in the Arctic
At the level of realpolitik, India will be looking at the opportunities for hydrocarbon exploration offered in the Arctic circle by joining hands with one of the five countries gearing up for the purpose — the U.S., Canada, Norway, Russia and Denmark. Officially, India maintained that its approach will be solely scientific, “unlike China and South Korea which are going for commercial benefit.
India’s Arctic Research Program, initiated in 2007, with its research base named “Himadri” at the International Arctic Research Base at Ny-Alesund, Svalbard, Norway in July 2008 for carrying out studies in disciplines like Glaciology, Atmospheric sciences & Biological sciences and entered into MOU with Norwegian Polar Research Institute of Norway, for cooperation in science, as also with Kings Bay (A Norwegian Government owned company) at Ny-Alesund for logistic and infrastructure facilities for undertaking Arctic research. As is clear, India lays its main thrust on climate change in the polar north.
China has forged much ahead in navigating the area with a three-month sea voyage in an ice breaker, the first Asian ship to undertake that journey. Interestingly, India committed over US$12million for financial investments in Arctic Studies for 5 years in 2013 and its major objectives of the Indian Research in Arctic Region, as defined by Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India, are:
To study the hypothesized tele-connections between the Arctic climate and the Indian monsoon by analyzing the sediment and ice core records from the Arctic glaciers and the Arctic Ocean.
To characterize sea ice in Arctic using satellite data to estimate the effect of global warming in the northern polar region.
To conduct research on the dynamics and mass budget of Arctic glaciers focusing on the effect of glaciers on sea-level change.
To carry out a comprehensive assessment of the flora and fauna of the Arctic vis-à vis their response to anthropogenic activities. In addition, it is proposed to undertake a comparative study of the life forms from both the Polar Regions.
At the AC 2013 meeting, 60,000 Inuit, represented by Aqqaluk Lynge, chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Council had appealed to countries like India to be more circumspect in their desire to drill for oil or minerals and demanded that the fate of the indigenous people not be jeopardized.
Scope of the above objectives for India’s research clearly misses the key people who live in the Arctic. India needs to be proactive to extend its presence outside its current Arctic research station, into the Russian Arctic and reach out to the Permanent Participants of AC. This will be forge good relations with the indigenous communities in Greenland, Canadian and Russian Arctic which will give the country a diplomatic and political leverage in the future Arctic.
What is in it for Russia?
Although Russia has been a powerful country in the Eurasian region, its geography has been cruel to her. Russia has unfortunately been a landlocked country and partially ice-locked. In the north, its access to the ocean is frozen in winter, Europe blocks its entry into the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea to its west, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan block its entry to the Arabian sea in south while Vladivostok, its sole warm water port, since 1860 is ice-locked for four months in a year and lies well into the Japan Sea which already is militarily dominated by Japan and South Korea.
Russia has always been interested in the warm water ports. A warm water port is the one which does not freezes in winters. Warm water ports are of great geopolitical and economic interest to Russia just like they are to China and U.S and Europe. As is evident from the recent campaigns in Syria and Ukraine, both of which host Russian Naval bases in Tartus and Sevastopol respectively. Crimea houses Russia’s only warm water port. Petropavlovsk Kamchatsky is the last warm water port on the Northern sea route from South East Asia to Europe.
The Tsars of Russia always had their eyes on the warm water ports in the south to control the world economy. It was Russian Tsar Peter the Great’s will to his subjects ‘to approach as near as possible to Constantinople and India’. According to him, “whoever governs there will be the true sovereign of the world”. He also advised to advance in the Persian Gulf as far as India (which can be translated into modern day Pakistan). Perhaps Indian Ocean was always part of the final goal of expansion policy of Russia.
And Russia had to diversify its accessibility of trade routes if the country envisions becoming a global economic power.
However it still holds one strategic interest for Russia, securing the shipping routes in Indian Ocean and mining of rare earth metals in the ocean bed.
Keeping that in mind, the Russian Naval doctrine (2012) spells out the priority areas which include ensuring its place as the second most powerful naval force in the world by focusing on remaining stronger than the rapidly expanding Chinese navy. This it will ensure by continued presence in strategically important maritime regions around the world regardless of distance from Russian home ports. In times of war, the doctrine highlights the Russian Navy will be able to defend itself.
The doctrine also defines the Indian Ocean Region as a Priority Area. According to the doctrine, development of friendly relations with India is the most important goal of the National Maritime Policy in the Indian Ocean region.
Land/Island swap between India and Russia?
India and Russia are time-tested, all-weather friends and their diplomatic relationship as well as strategic partnership cannot be surpassed.
The relations between the two countries stretch across areas of science, technology, space tech, defense, nuclear power, hydrocarbons, trade and investment and cultural synergy. India imports 79 percent of its military hardware from Russia (2008–12). The signing of “Declaration on the India-Russia Strategic Partnership” in October 2000 and the elevation of this Strategic Partnership to the level of a “Special and Privileged Strategic Partnership in December 2010 has only strengthened this relationship.”
By 2020, the North-West passage crossing Canada’s Arctic Ocean could become open to shipping on regular basis which would shorten the distance between East Asia and Western Europe from 24,000 km to 13,600 km, while same journey via Russian Arctic will be even shorter which will be reduced to 12,800 km, thus reducing transit time by 10–15 days. The opening of this new maritime route offers tremendous economic and strategic military opportunities for India.
Becoming a permanent arctic state, India will assure a permanent role and say in decisions focusing on the exploitation Arctic’s natural resources. It will be able to partially control the Northern Sea route, have access to maintain its military presence in the arctic, and an opportunity to expand its territory beyond South Asia. It will also safeguard future flow of Indian goods thus securing a place in the future as an economic and military power.
India is not an Arctic state, however, India’s permanent presence and role in the Arctic could be secured by deploying solution protocols, perhaps a possible Island (land) swap between the Russian federation and Republic of India. That means exploring the legal transactions that transfer sovereignty which remain perfectly legal under International Law.
India shall request part of Lomonosov Ridge and the Mendeleev Ridge in return for taking a firm political stand on the on the International Stage that will boost Russia’s claims and grant an Arctic Prize for India’s, a guaranteed geo-political victory. In return, India can also offer an Island to Russia in the Indian Ocean. By supporting Moscow’s position and ensuring India’s permanent presence in the Arctic Ocean, India shall gain access to the rich deposits and also utilize the North Sea Route.
Which Islands?
India is blessed with two groups of islands, Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the Bay of Bengal and Lakshadweep Islands near the South Western Coast of India. The Andaman and Nicobar Islands comprise a group of 527 islands whereas Lakshadweep comprises of twelve atolls, with a total of thirty-nine islands and islets.
Andaman houses India’s sole tri-service command thus a swap of Andaman and Nicobar Islands is out of the equation as the country would not want to give up its established capability of joint warfare- military doctrine. However, one island from the group of Lakshadweep archipelago, (in North-West Indian Ocean) offers a higher feasibility for swap keeping in mind that it is one of the Union Territories of India (federally administered territory)
Minicoy, is the southernmost atoll of Lakshadweep archipelago and is the second largest and the southernmost among the islands of the Lakshadweep archipelago. It is located 400 Km west off the coast of Trivandrum, 125 km to the north of Thuraakunu, Maldives.
This Island offers best solutions to the Russian naval doctrine (2012) priorities and shall fulfill the Russian dream to become second strongest naval power in the world, by dotting its permanent presence in the second largest Ocean of the world. This shall bring balance of power in the Indian Ocean which is currently dominated by the U.S and France with its large military presence in this Ocean. It shall also fulfill the final will of Peter the Great of extending Russian presence in the Persian Gulf and up to India. Third, a perfect Russian warm water port which shall be operational all round the year, be constructed in these waters which shall strengthen Russian Economy and naval and military mobilization.
Is swap possible?
UNCLOS agreement which defines the rights and responsibilities of nations with respect to their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources does not mention laws for swap of islands. Perhaps it is legal for countries to swap an island. History offers many examples. The Alaska purchase by U.S. from Russia in 1867, the Louisiana Purchase by the U.S from France in 1803, are amongst the most notable example. In 1916, Denmark handed over its complete West Indies territories including the islands of St. Croix, St John and St Thomas- to the U.S with a price tag of US$ 25 Million (Tansill 1968). Today these islands comprise the U.S. Virgin Islands. So the answer is yes.
The most recent swap of enclaves with Bangladesh (2015) is a testimony to the willingness of India’s leadership and its policy makers to explore this option. However Russia would not be as easy as this one. It almost took 4 decades for India and Bangladesh to settle this dispute.
In an ideal situation, it will depend on the leadership and policy makers of India and Russia to make it possible as in order for an exchange of land, (1)the sovereign leadership of the both the countries must be willing, a swap cannot happen without mutual interests ; (2) both countries must have the financial wherewithal to effect the purchase (and the military might to defend the newly acquired territory); and (3) they must have the ready strategic plan ready to guide their respective course of actions for at least a century. Any transfer of territory between two countries is generally negotiated as a treaty: in exchange for monetary exchange plus other considerations, the territory of the selling country and its residents will also need to consent on the transfer.
Challenges and Threat- a word of caution
New evolving strategic alliances requires trusted relationships. With lessons from Guantanamo Bay, India would also need to consider a backup and back out plan as part of the treaty in case the two strategic friend nations turn belligerent and one of the treaty bound countries uses military force to take over. It must be noted that the Lakshadweep Islands are only 972 Km from Mumbai which is home to India’s Western Naval Command.
Certain considerations: A swap shall bring the two erstwhile cold war powers and historical nuclear belligerents too close and may upset U.S and France. It might reach a point of possible confrontation in the future. The Lakshadweep Islands lie approx. 2000 kms north of the U.S. base in Diego Garcia which could be considered as an immediate threat to U.S. as the distance of Kavaratti, capital of Lakshadweep, from Diego Garcia is just 2081.93 kilometers or 1124.152268 nautical miles.
The Diego Garcia Island in the Chagos Archipelago, is part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, and has been used as large naval and military base (Camp Justice) by the United States forces since at least the mid-1960s, under lease from the United Kingdom. It is one of two critical US bomber bases in the Asia Pacific region, along with Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, and Pacific Ocean. With Russian presence in proximity, U.S won’t be happy either with India or with the new neighbour.
This could possibly lead to grouping and emergence of NATO like collective agreement of Indian Ocean coastal Nations such as Australia, South Africa, Gulf Countries, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore and even France, U.S. and China to counter the Russians and Indians.
Conclusion
The possible scenarios and solutions that would open doors of opportunities in Arctic for India may sound not practical or even impossible. Perhaps this paper is a belief in the adage by German Historian Max Weber- “believe in and aim for the impossible so that the possible becomes true.” From the point of view of geographical distance, Russia will be the most attractive partner. But for that to happen, India will have to take a firm political stand on the Lomonosov Ridge and the Mendeleev Ridge which Russia claims are an extension of its continental shelf. By supporting Moscow’s position, India could get access to the rich deposits and also utilize the North Sea Route.
An agreement shall allow India to expand its maritime presence beyond Indian Ocean, too far into the Arctic. This is also the high time for Russia to approach as India scrambles to reach out to the other Indian Ocean coastal countries for new naval bases. The recent interest shown by India in the Hambantota port in Sri Lanka, ports in Oman, Maldives and Seychelles as it struggles to balance rising Chinese influence in the Indian Ocean to counter China’s String of Pearls strategy.
India also needs to be proactive. It must extend its presence outside its current Arctic research station, into the Russian Arctic and reach out to the Permanent Participants of AC and forge relations with the indigenous communities in Greenland, Canadian and Russian Arctic. There has been no attempt by India, to reach out to these communities in the past but in order to lay the foundation of a possible future relationship, Indian leadership, seasoned diplomats and scientist community should be willing to leave their comfort zones. Expanding the scope of research in its Arctic based Research station and including the arctic society, culture and its people would be a good beginning.
