It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia plans to annex 460,000 square miles of the Arctic

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 08:54 PM
link   

Russia plans to annex 460,000 square miles of the Arctic


www.guardian.co.uk

It is already the world's biggest country, spanning 11 time zones and stretching from Europe to the far east. But yesterday Russia signalled its intention to get even bigger by announcing an audacious plan to annex a vast 460,000 square mile chunk of the frozen and ice-encrusted Arctic.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 08:54 PM
link   
The reason this is being done is for the newly found oil deposits. I'm not sure I support or agree with this. It disturbs me and I dont think anything good will come of it. Nations shouldnt be able to just go around annexing land.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Here's another article:

Putin's Arctic invasion: Russia lays claim to the North Pole - and all its gas, oil, and diamonds

"Russian President Vladimir Putin is making an astonishing bid to grab a vast chunk of the Arctic - so he can tap its vast potential oil, gas and mineral wealth. "

www.dailymail.co.uk...



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 09:58 PM
link   
The US and many other countries will not recognize it, nor will the UN for that matter. All this should make for some interesting scenarios when the ice melts enough to allow the 'Northern Oil Rush' to begin. Big national corporations backed by the political and military muscle of their host nations will be competing against one another while the whole matter remains in legal lingo. We might see more events like Iran's naval kidnapping on our TV's.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The US and many other countries will not recognize it, nor will the UN for that matter. All this should make for some interesting scenarios when the ice melts enough to allow the 'Northern Oil Rush' to begin. Big national corporations backed by the political and military muscle of their host nations will be competing against one another while the whole matter remains in legal lingo. We might see more events like Iran's naval kidnapping on our TV's.


My personal opinion is that Russia will have its forces and platforms in place before the West decides to go to the Arctic circle for resources. It could be a mess.

If Russia is able to get away with this, the West might as well annex the other half of the Arctic and the whole Antarctic while were at it.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Ok, I have a question.

Who exactly owns the area they are annexing?

I don't really have much to say until I know that.



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Ok, I have a question.

Who exactly owns the area they are annexing?

I don't really have much to say until I know that.


Currently no one, its international (think international waters).

I've never given it too much thought - but I was allways under the impression that if you could be bothered to go there and set up whatever it is you wanted to set up, then no one would stop you so long as your not treading on any ones toes or breaking international law.

460,000 sq miles seem far too excessive tho - if they could locate what they want i.e. oil, they should be able to set up an oil field, then wee could go set up one next door, fairs fair!



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
Currently no one, its international (think international waters).


Ok, is it like Antarctica though, where treaties prohibit any nation from claiming land
or building military bases there though?


I always sort of thought that the Arctic was all divvied up to different nations,
just like an area that was never used though.

[edit on 6/28/2007 by iori_komei]



posted on Jun, 28 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by Now_Then
Currently no one, its international (think international waters).


Ok, is it like Antarctica though, where treaties prohibit any nation from claiming land
or building military bases there though?


I always sort of thought that the Arctic was all divvied up to different nations,
just like an area that was never used though.

[edit on 6/28/2007 by iori_komei]


I believe its classified as International Waters. Mostly frozen International Waters



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Ok, is it like Antarctica though, where treaties prohibit any nation from claiming land or building military bases there though?


No, there are no restrictions on military bases or weapons and claims to land can be made. Currently, outside the 200nm EEZ it's classed as international waters and it is neutral. And in a perfect world all claims for land would go through the UN under 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Nations that want to claim land must present scientific data to support such claim to the UN which in turn would then decide who gets what. However we do no live in a perfect world, as such many nations, notably the US, do not recognize the 1982 convention nor any claims that are made through the UN. We have, and have had for some time now, a big mess in the Arctic between several nations. This issue will only get worse as the ice melts, in the end no one will follow any law, regulation or treaty. It will come down to who is most able (see economically, politically and most importantly militarily) to unilaterally enforce their claims upon others. This inevitably means Russia and the United States, as I said before it will get really interesting later on. Imagine a 'wild west' of sorts in the Arctic between nations and their nationally backed corporations.

This even has the potential to start a major conflict, though I do not believe it will get to that point. However it will not be resolved anytime soon or quietly unless the major plays are satisfied.

Already nations are gearing up and building infrastructure in that part of the world as well as "testing the waters" if you will. Both physically (see military expeditions, vessels etc...) and politically (Russia's, Norway's, Canada's claims etc...). The US has routinely sent nuclear submarines through (disputed) Canadian territorial waters to go from the North Atlantic to the Pacific Arctic. Despite protest from the Canadians we assert right of passage and they have not tried to physically stop us. Expect more of this but on a much much larger scale and with the stakes being greater.

In the end I fear it will come down to who has the biggest guns, doesn't it always?

Race To The Arctic
Us Subs In The Arctic



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then
...if they could locate what they want i.e. oil, they should be able to set up an oil field, then wee could go set up one next door, fairs fair!


That is exactly what will happen, but with both sides threatening to use force and other means in order to protect their self asserted territorial claims.



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Its interesting times we live in, We op to build a defense system in their backyard/frontyard, and they want to grab some more land, ( possibly to store some items they dont want to be hit by the defense system?,

Lots of things ( events ) going on in the past 7 years have been very interesting, and maybe even a precurser* to other events yet to come, If you ask me, theres some building going on for events to come on many homefronts.

We are not in peaceful times, no matter what treaties/ laws/ governments say.
and its alot to do with energy as well as other "higher" minded agendas. Im willing to say we will have a war of the nations within if not sooner in a year. I would place my money on fall/07.

call it as you will, but a country the size of Russia isnt trying to broadin its boarders, its trying to stablize them, More land means more eyes, room to build/ hide much of what you dont want touched.




[edit on 29-6-2007 by Tranceopticalinclined]



posted on Jun, 29 2007 @ 11:55 PM
link   
my post transferred from duplicate thread:

I think this is ridiculous, but it still needs to be dealt with. Even though this area probably can't be practically be used for anything for a very long time, even if global warming pans out, Russia can't just be allowed to lay claim on international waters like this against all internationally accepted laws and treaties.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 12:55 AM
link   
No one can "own" international waters which are waters outside of a nations 12nm territorial sea boundary. Outside of this there is the 200nm EEZ which a nation has exclusive economical and developing rights over. However in this case the UN has stated that the EEZ zone of the nations who own land in the Arctic circle can be expanded if they provide scientific data showing how far their continental shelf extends out. It still does not mean that that particular country "owns" anything or that they can restrict travel and impose regulations. It just means that they have exclusive economical right to the resources within that zone.



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 05:29 AM
link   
How about a few of us from ATS get our heads together and claim a bit for our selves?

(not a one liner - anymore)



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 07:11 AM
link   
This is laughable. I for one hope that many nations stake their claim in this disputed region to maintain checks and balances. No nation should have exclusive rights and god forbid there was actually a notion brought forward that countries should share the potential resources. Yes I'm being somewhat facetious here but it just amuses me when I hear the counter arguments.

This is somewhat similar to the US space claim that ""The United States is committed to the exploration and use of outer space by all nations for peaceful purposes, and for the benefit of all humanity. Consistent with this principle, 'peaceful purposes' allow US defence and intelligence-related activities in pursuit of national interests." Indeed...comply or we'll just kick your ass (although from recent conflicts this doesn't appear to be the end result).

One other thing to consider. China I think would be a huge player here. They are devouring natural resources at a staggering rate and what better way to ensure those same resources are available. The Russians are posturing but the Chinese I don't think would let other infringe upon them so lightly.

brill



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Here's a map: www.geographicguide.com...


could someone show the rest of us just where is this
"Lomonosov ridge"
that is as large as France, Germany, Italy combined ???

from this graphic/map of the Arctic circle region,
Russia already has a lot of land within it.



afterthought
Russia could, if a UN resource agency was created to administer
oil leases, etc. in the International Arctic seas,
pay/rent/lease the underwater tract of territory they're belatedly claiming



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Here are their claim files to the UN from 2001 with some maps showing the areas: www.un.org...

I think they're trying to see if anyone will try to fight them over their annexation, and would likely settle for (far) less than this...



posted on Jun, 30 2007 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Count
Here are their claim files to the UN from 2001 with some maps showing the areas: www.un.org...


thanks,
i see the maps but they are in Russian, and i couldn't find a 'dotted' area
which would indicate the seabed territory in question.


but the claim did get me looking deeper....
Russia 1st made a claim that the 'Lomonosov ridge'
was part of their continental shelf in 1997
....their claim was denied....
Russia has 10 years to file claims for changes in an arctic-seabed 'treaty'
and that's what this fiasco is about.


i found somewhat vague sites for this disputed area,
the 'ridge' is some 1,500 miles in length

one source puts the area off Canada
another source puts the site off Nord, Greenland



i found a new article that explains things better:
dose.canada.com...

i think the last line in the article says it all....!!



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join