Abstract

Increased melting of Arctic sea ice due to climate change attracts interests of national states who sense the potential that opening northern waters will enhance access of the Northwest Passage (NWP) and subsoil resources. Claims for Arctic sovereignty include conflicts around the status of the NWP, ownership of resources, but also attempts of Inuit to decolonize through the establishment of self-government in their respective countries that receive a new urgency due to the effects of climate change. From a review of different existing institutional and organizational bodies and mechanisms that serve as intervention tools in the sovereignty disputes in the Arctic (the UN, the Arctic Council and the Inuit Circumpolar Council) it emerges that such actors can ultimately only provide a non-binding platform for orientation and exchange and eventually leave nation-states as ultimate power-holders which reinforces and is in accordance with realist theory and its understanding of the international system as anarchic (i.e. as lacking a decision-making and binding overarching authority beyond the state-level). Despite their good intentions, external general acceptance and partial success, the potential of the organizations and institutions analyzed here is also ultimately challenged by nation states, who seem to prefer circumventing such intervention tools to be able to interact instead with each other via officialdiplomacy or by making singular and autonomous decisions to maximize their power and sovereignty.