Journals / Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 19

Polar Policies of the International Society: The Comparison between Arctic-Antarctic

Uluslararası Toplumun Kutup Politikaları: Arktik-Antarktika Karşılaştırması

Pages
207–237
Publication Date
2019-10-25
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Unlike Antarctica, where the solidarity of international community has ensured the order with the perspective of justice; the governance in the Arctic Region provided by the international community is based on a pluralistic perspective, which is regulated by the institutions such as diplomacy and international law of English School theory.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:As a result of the global climate change, the melting ice caps have revealed the economic opportunities in the Polar Regions and this change has led to question the status of the two regions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:On the contrary of Antarctic as a common heritage of mankind, Arctic become conflict zone between sovereign nation states.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Unlike Antarctica, where the solidarity of international community has ensured the order with the perspective of justice; the governance in the Arctic Region provided by the international community is based on a pluralistic perspective, which is regulated by the institutions such as diplomacy and international law of English School theory.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Arktik · Antarktika · İngiliz Okulu

Abstract

As a result of the global climate change, the melting ice caps have revealed the economic opportunities in the Polar Regions and this change has led to question the status of the two regions. On the contrary of Antarctic as a common heritage of mankind, Arctic become conflict zone between sovereign nation states. This study analyses the activities of international society in Polar Regions based on the English School theory. Moreover, comparing the legal, economic and political status of the Polar Regions, the distinction between the pluralist-solidarist approaches of the English School was evaluated within the context of the difference between order and justice. Unlike Antarctica, where the solidarity of international community has ensured the order with the perspective of justice; the governance in the Arctic Region provided by the international community is based on a pluralistic perspective, which is regulated by the institutions such as diplomacy and international law of English School theory.

Özet

Küresel iklim değişikliğinin bir sonucu olarak eriyen buzullar, Kutup Bölgeleri’ndeki ekonomik fırsatları ortaya çıkarmış ve bu durum iki bölgenin statüsünün sorgulanmasına yol açmıştır. İnsanlığın ortak mirası olarak kabul edilen Antarktika’ya nazaran Arktik, ulus devletlerin egemenlik mücadelesine sahne olmaktadır. Bu çalışma, İngiliz Okulu teorisinin uluslararası toplum anlayışı çerçevesinde Kutup Bölgeleri’ndeki faaliyetlerini ele almaktadır. Kutup Bölgeleri’nin hukuki, ekonomik ve politik statüsünün karşılaştırıldığı bu çalışmada İngiliz Okulu’nun çoğulcu-dayanışmacı ayrımı düzen-adalet farkı kapsamında değerlendirilmiştir. Dayanışmacı uluslararası toplumun adalet anlayışı ile düzen sağladığı Antarktika’nın aksine; diplomasi, uluslararası hukuk gibi İngiliz Okulu kuramlarıyla düzen sağlanan Arktik Bölgesi yönetiminde uluslararası toplumun çoğulcu perspektifinin ağır bastığı gözlenmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ŞİMŞEK, A. İ. (2019). Polar Policies of the International Society: The Comparison between Arctic-Antarctic. Akdeniz İİBF Dergisi, Cilt: 19, 207–237. https://ajindex.com/articles/1019314

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Ağkaya, O. (2016). “İngiliz Okulu ve Uluslararası Toplum Düşüncesi”. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 71(4): 1059-1089.
  2. Anderson, R. T. (2008). “The Antarctic Scene: Legal and Political Facts”. G. D. Triggs. (Ed.). The Antarctic Treaty Regime: Law, Environment and Resources. Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom. 67-64.
  3. Antarctic Treaty Secretariat. (2011). “The Antarctic Treaty”. http://www.ats.aq/e/ats.htm (erişim tarihi: 26 Temmuz 2017). Antarctic Treaty Parties. https://www.ats.aq/devAS/ats_parties.aspx?lang=e (erişim tarihi: 30 Temmuz 2019).
  4. Arctic Council Member States. (2015). https://arctic-council.org/index.php/en/about-us/member-states (erişim tarihi: 26 Temmuz 2019).
  5. Arctic Council Working Groups. (2015). https://arctic-council.org/index.php/en/about-us/working-groups (erişim tarihi: 3 Ağustos 2019). Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy. (1991). http://library.arcticportal.org/1542/1/artic_environment.pdf (erişim tarihi: 3 Ağustos 2019). Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act. (2015). https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/a-12/ (erişim tarihi: 5 Ağustos 2019).
  6. Attenborough, D. (2011). Frozen Planet Belgeseli-To the Ends of the Earth, BBC ve The Open University. Atvur, S. (2017). “Ekolojik Perspektifte Antarktika’da Güvenlik”. H. Gümrükçü, G. Ersoy, et al. (Ed.). Küresel Bakışla Kutup Çağı-3: Tarihi ve Hukuki Perspektif-Ekolojik Dönüşüm. Efil Yayınevi. Ankara, 89-109.
  7. Başlar, K. (1998). The Concept of the Common Heritage of Mankind in International Law. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
  8. United Kingdom. Berkman, P. A. (2011). “President Eisenhower, The Antarctic Treaty, and the Origin of International Spaces”. P. A. Berkman, M. A. Lang, D. W. H. Walton ve O. R. Young (Ed.). Science Diplomacy: Antarctica, Science, and the Governance of International Spaces. Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri. 17-27.
  9. Berkman, P. A., Vylegzhanin, A. N. ve Young, O. (2016). “Governing the Bering Strait Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues and Future Options”. Ocean Develompent and International Law, 47 (2): 186-217. Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi – BMDHS. (1982). https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf (erişim tarihi: 26 Temmuz 2019).
  10. Boyd, R., Bjerkgard, T., Nordahl, B. ve Schiellerup, H. (2016). Mineral Resources in Arctic: An Introduction. Geological Survey of Norway. Norway. Bryanski, G. “Russia’s Putin says Arctic Trade Route to Rival Suez”. Reuters, 22.09.2011. Bull H.