Arctic Yearbook 2015 - Page 297

297 Arctic Yearbook 2015 and perspectives that are instructive when approaching how best to expand the capacity of existing governing regimes. The first part of this paper explores the history behind, and structure of, current governing arrangements in the Arctic. When considering relevant governing analogues, scholars often turn to the Antarctic Treaty System. This author argues the comparison is inappropriate. Competing resources claims, territorial disputes, differing governing priorities, and fundamental geography make the two regions polar opposites, or as phrased by Oran Young, “antipodes in more than geography” (Young 1992: 184). The second part of this paper identifies five areas for governing realignments; these concepts are drawn from the region’s history, existing structures, and tactics already employed. Covered in the discussion are ad hoc, bilateral and multilateral governing structures, functional strategies, regional seas agreements, and a comprehensive Arctic Treaty. The second part of the paper primes the analogue introduced in part three – the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). With the introduction of the ASEAN analogue, a relevant regional model is introduced. Sharing similar high-political stresses (military tension, resource and territorial disputes) and low-political norms (a zone of peace doctrine, a non-legal governing personality) with the High North, ASEAN’s success in achieving peaceful regional integration holds tremendous promise for the Arctic. The need to view challenges in the Arctic beyond the domestic political lens makes the analogue valuable as ASEAN leaves the domestic political escape hatch open; states are free to step away from the multilateral table where they see independent comparative advantages. It should go without saying that obvious features make Southeast Asia and the Arctic distinctly different regions; however, distinct similarities merit scholars’ attention and consideration. Making the leap from theory to practice, the paper closes offering a series of policy prescriptions – ostensibly derived from the ASEAN analogue – for Arctic policy-makers. From working toward an Arctic economic community to adopting a declaration of non-interference, it becomes evident that shared issues with tried solutions unite Southeast Asia and the Arctic. The desire for cooperation in the Arctic is both genuine and demonstrated. When a non-regional perspective and a globalized attitude are adopted, it quickly becomes evident Southeast Asia offers instructive prefabricated structures that are ready for adoption in the Arctic. It is the intention of this paper to make some of those key linkages both evident and accessible. The Antarctic analogue As touched on in the introduction of this paper, Antarctic governance has been called upon, in both academic and policy-making circles, as an analogue for Arctic governance. Specifically, the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 is brought into focus as a worthy analytical frame through which Arctic regimes can be considered. Most critically, the locus of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) is a declaration in Article I that “Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only” (ATS 1959). Keeping in mind that the Antarctic Treaty was signed while the Cold War was in full swing, the front-and-center emphasis placed on peaceful activity should not come as a surprise. A second defining feature of the ATS can Lidow