Англо-американские международно-правовые доктрины о современном статусе Арктики тема диссертации и автореферата по ВАК РФ 12.00.10, доктор наук Журавлева Инна Петровна

• Журавлева Инна Петровна
• доктор наук
• 2019

Оглавление диссертации доктор наук Журавлева Инна Петровна

Оглавление

Abbreviations

Introduction

CHAPTER 1. GENERAL THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL ISSUES OF THE STATUS OF THE ARCTIC OCEAN (ACCORDING TO THE INTERNATIONAL LAW

DOCTRINES)

§ 1. The notions of "doctrines in international law" and "the teachings of the most highly

qualified publicists of the various nations"

§ 2. A preliminary overview of the Anglo-American international law doctrines on the status of

the Arctic Ocean

§ 3. The UNCLOS and the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean: a comparison of the Russian and Anglo-American doctrines

CHAPTER 2. BASELINES ALONG THE ARCTIC COAST (INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS OF FOREIGN PRACTICES OF DRAWING STRAIGHT BASELINES IN

THE ARCTIC)

§1. International law rules applicable to drawing baselines by coastal states

§ 2. The legal practice of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union on baselines along the Arctic

coast

§ 3. The legal practice of other Arctic states with respect to baselines along their Arctic coast 107 § 4. Options for specifying the location of the baselines along the coast of the Russian Federation in the Arctic, in the context of foreign international law doctrines

CHAPTER 3. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL POSITIONS OF RUSSIA'S NEIGHBOURING ARCTIC STATES ON THE CONTINENTAL SHELF IN THE ARCTIC (ACCORDING

TO FOREIGN LEGAL SOURCES)

§ 1. General characteristic of the matter

§2. The legal practice of Norway and Denmark of making "partial submissions" to the

Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf

§ 3. Proposals for the Russian Federation to take account of the positions of other Arctic states as well as the foreign international legal doctrine for improving the legal policy with respect to

Arctic shelf

§4. Denmark's submission on the continental shelf in the Arctic (issues of fact and scholarly

opinions)

§ 5. The opportunities for using foreign doctrines to prevent the loss of a part of Russian shelf inherent in the Russian "submissions" of 2001 and

CHAPTER 4. THE POLAR CODE AS THE NEW COMPONENT IN THE REGIME OF

NAVIGATION IN THE ARCTIC

§ 1. General characteristics of the legal regime of navigation in the Arctic according to Anglo-

American doctrine. Article 234 of UNCLOS

§ 2. Status of the Polar Code: doctrinal views

§ 3. Legally binding and non-binding elements of the Polar Code

CHAPTER 5. THE LEGAL REGIME OF THE BERING STRAIT (AS INTERPRETED

BY RUSSIAN AND FOREIGN EXPERTS)

§1. The definition of "Bering Strait"

§ 2. Avenues of Russia-U.S. cooperation in clarifying the Bering Strait region's legal regime

§3. Content of the key legal sources applicable to the Bering Strait region

§ 3.1. Universal international agreements applicable to the Bering Strait region

§3.2. Regional treaties, declarations, and other regional documents applicable to the Bering Strait

region

§3.3. Bilateral treaties applicable to the Bering Strait region

CHAPTER 6. FOREIGN AND RUSSIAN DOCTRINAL VIEWS ON THE LEGAL

REGIME OF CONSERVATION AND RATIONAL MANAGEMENT OF MARINE

LIVING RESOURCES IN THE ARCTIC OCEAN

§ 1. Applicable general theory

§ 2. Doctrinal views on the legal bases of Russia's bilateral cooperation with other Arctic states

§ 3. Thawing of ice in the central Arctic basin and scholarly legal recommendations

§ 4. New legal regimes of conserving and managing bioresources in the Central Arctic: the doctrinal choice between the universal and regional approaches

CHAPTER 7. FOREIGN STUDIES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ASPECTS OF

ENSURING ENVIRONMENTAL SECURITY IN THE ARCTIC REGION

§ 1. General overview of the international legal effects of climate change in the Arctic

§ 2. General characteristic of the prospects of international legal regulation of potential conflicts

due to climate change in the Arctic

§ 3. The Arctic model of sustainable development: doctrinal insights in Anglo-American studies

§ 4. Anglo-American doctrines on EIA in the Arctic context

§ 5. Anglo-American doctrinal views on the precautionary principle in the Arctic context

§ 6. Anglo-American doctrinal proposals to improve the international legal mechanisms of ecosystem management in the Arctic

CONCLUSION

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Annex

Введение диссертации (часть автореферата) на тему «Англо-американские международно-правовые доктрины о современном статусе Арктики»

Introduction

Substantiation of the choice of subject-matter. In his unfinished Ode to Peter the Great, M.V. Lomonosov emphasized the importance for Russia of Tsar Peter the Great's efforts in 17-18 centuries to protect the state's northernmost borders; in the poem, Lomonosov has the young Russian Tsar prophesize the discovery of the Northeast Passage, "Columbuses of Russia, in scorn of sullen fate, will to the Orient discover a new path amidst the ice, and our Nation brave will reach America". 1 Russian scholarly works amply cite M.V. Lomonosov's depiction of the Arctic Ocean as "a vast expanse, where Russia's glory can increase, combined with unprecedented benefit". More than once have scholars noted the geostrategic importance of the Arctic for Russia, the legal effect of the heroic labours in 14-19 centuries of the Russian pioneers, pathfinders of the Arctic, who sacrificed their lives so the Russian Arctic could grow, and Russia's sovereignty could expand to new remote Arctic plains; they have highlighted the pivotal role that Russia and other Arctic states have played in formulating the special legal status of the Arctic Ocean and its seas, starting from the 1825 Russian-English Treaty and the 1867 Russian-American Treaty, that were the first to delimit the rights of Russia and its neighbouring states to their "Polar possessions" by sectors (along the meridians going up to the North Pole). The reality, however, is that this "patriotic" vector in Russian international legal scholarship is omitted in the most authoritative foreign international legal doctrines, the ones published in English and predominant not only in the US and the UK, but generally in the English-speaking (and thus the largest) legal community.

1 Cited in Severnyi tekst russkoi literatury [The Northern Text of Russian Literature]. Issue. 2. Khudozhestvennaya kartina mira. M. SAFU. 2014. Ed by E.Sh. Galimova. (182 P.) P. 18.

2 Cited in Vylegzhanin A.N., Zilanov V.K. Shpitsbergen: pravovoi rezhim prilegayushchikh morskikh raionov [Spitzbergen: The Legal Regime of Adjacent Maritime Areas]. M. 2006. P. 6.

3 For more details, see Vylegzhanin A.N. Pravovoe polozhenie Arkticheskogo regiona v dokumentakh [Documents on the Legal Status of the Arctic Region]. / Arkticheskii region: problemy mezhdunarodnogo sotrudnichestva [The Arctic Region: Issues of International Cooperation]. Vol. 3. Primenimye pravovye istochniki [Applicable Law]. М. 2013. P. 16-26.

Furthermore, at present, given the substantial reduction of the surface area of the centuries-old ice in the Arctic, not only the economic and military activity in the Arctic Ocean including its seas has increased, but the states' interest in making clear the legal regime of that smallest of the oceans has also soared.4 Not just the eight Arctic nations, whose territory overlaps with the Arctic Circle, but many non-Arctic states, too, are adopting basic legal documents setting forth their policy in the Arctic.5 It is notable that attempts of the non-Arctic States to create their own legal instruments relating to the Arctic Ocean are not considered in the fundamental U.S. "Arctic Law and Policy Year in Review".6 These attempts are considered however in Russian law doctrines.

During the Yeltsin years, NATO succeeded in changing Russia's legal policy in the Arctic, starting from the notorious 1997 Resolution of the Government of Russia. The Resolution, for the first time, reflected Russia's agreement with NATO's position that it is not the existing customary international legal rules that form the foundation of the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean, including those on the sectoral delimitation of rights to islands and lands, including underwater ones (according to the approach maintained by the Russian Empire and the USSR), but rather the new international treaty - the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter, UNCLOS) (even though at the 3rd UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, the USSR delegation never viewed it as applicable to the Arctic). Following the 1997 Resolution, the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs drafted the respective documents and charts, according to which, for the first time in Russian history, the seabed area within the Russian Arctic sector was mapped as excluded from Russia's sovereignty. Apart from that apparent loss of territory by Russia, the new Arctic policy launched

4 Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Ed. by P.A. Berkman and A.N. Vylegzhanin. Springer. Dordrecht. 2013. P. XIX-XXVIII. (459 P.).

5 T. Koivurova, E. Molenaar. International Governance and Regulation of the Marine Arctic. Oslo. WWF. 2009. 38 PP.

6 Arctic Law and Policy Year Review: 2017. 2018 Washington Journal of Environmental Law and Policy. P. 106263.

7 A. Vylegzhanin, Dudykina, I., Kienko, E., Salygin, V. Positions of the non-Arctic states on the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean. Gosudarstvo i pravo [Journal of State and Law]. No. 10. 2018. P.124-135.

during the Yeltsin years undermined the previously stable legal environment in the Arctic. The Arctic Ocean floor was no longer regarded as the continental shelf area of the five Arctic states delimited along meridian lines. Russia took the approach, where only the 200-mile zone was its continental shelf, while the rest it intended to "accrue" by addressing the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (hereinafter, the CLCS). Norway, Denmark, and Canada followed Russia's example of approaching the Commission for the "accretion" of their shelf in the Arctic, having promptly estimated that with the new legal criteria for the boundaries based on geological data, each of them could better ensure its national interests in the Arctic: Norway, by consolidating its rights to the shelf north of Spitzbergen; and Canada - by stepping beyond its own Arctic sector and intervening into that of Russia. The international legal doctrine has different opinions on the frenzy the Russian agencies have created since 1997 around the issue of clarifying the status of the Arctic Ocean seabed, ranging from views to the effect that there are no alternatives to the legal method (adopted in 1997) of specifying the boundaries of the high-latitude Arctic shelf based on one of the Articles of the 1982 UNCLOS, and, consequently, that a spurt of competition and even conflict on the matter among Arctic states is inevitable; to criticism of Russia's new approach as a strategic legal mistake that undercut the legal titles in the Arctic held by the Russian Empire and the USSR.

Against this background, an analysis of the Anglo-American doctrines of international law related to the present-day theoretical issues of the status of the Arctic is, without doubt, relevant both in terms of theory and much-needed by practice.

Existing legal literature on the subject-matter of this study. At the

present moment, the Russian academic literature lacks complex studies that would analyse the perception of the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean engrained in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law.

Some international legal issues related to that regime are to an extent covered by works on the specific theoretical and practical aspects of the North

Passage, the Northwest Passage, the Polar Code, and the Central Arctic. At the same time, however, the foreign interpretations even of these issues of international law have not been comprehensively studied by Russian scholars.

A number of issues of international law related to construing the status of the Arctic Ocean proffered in the Anglo-American doctrines, have been examined in the works by the deceased Professors V.L. Lakhtin, Yu.G. Barsegov, S.V. Molodtsov, A.K. Zhudro, F.I. Kozhevnikov, and M.I. Lazarev. Among the contemporary Russian academic works on questions of international law closely tied to the topic of this dissertation, one should note the treatises of a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, I.S. Ivanov, and Professor A.N. Vylegzhanin, and, primarily, their collection of legal documents The Arctic Region: Issues of International Cooperation. Vol. 3. Applicable Legal Sources, published by the Russian International Affairs Council (hereinafter, the RIAC) in 2013. In an extensive introduction to the collection, its specialized editor Professor A.N. Vylegzhanin supplies a general overview of the international legal issues of the current specification of the Arctic Ocean's status. A Chinese translation of the book was published in 2015. An English translation is underway. That said, the book does not contain a substantive analysis of the Anglo-American doctrines on the contemporary legal regime of the Arctic and, first and foremost, of the Arctic Ocean, including its peripheral seas. Nor can such an analysis be found in other in-depth studies on the international law of the sea: most notably, in the treatise International Law of the Sea by A.N. Vylegzhanin, S.A. Gureyev, and G.G. Ivanov (Moscow: Yuridicheskaya Literatura, 2003); and in International Law of the Sea. A Handbook by a group of authors, edited by Honoured Lawyer of the RSFSR G.S. Gorshkov (Moscow: Voennoe izdatel'stvo, 1985). It would serve little purpose to list other numerous academic publications on the legal regime of the Arctic here; they offer individual interpretations of the rules of UNCLOS as applicable equally to the Indian Ocean and the Arctic, but contain evident inaccuracies and errors analysed further here. Nor do such publications provide a

meaningful analysis of the Anglo-American doctrines on the legal regime of the Arctic.

Among the existing monographs on one of the most topical international legal issues - the Arctic shelf - it is worth giving special notice to the 2013 brochure Proposals to the Roadmap for the Development of International Legal Bases of Cooperation of Russia in the Arctic edited by a Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, President of the RIAC, former Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, I.S. Ivanov. This booklet discusses the existing bilateral and regional alternative solutions to the most pressing international legal issues in the Arctic Region, including that of specifying the boundaries of the Arctic shelf. Nevertheless, first, this book, too, lacks a comprehensive analysis of the Anglo-American doctrines of specifying the legal regime of the Arctic regions, and, second, new developments in the facts and the applicable international law have occurred since the brochure was released.

From among foreign academic works, Canadian law doctrines on the current status of the Arctic are of special importance. It will be considered in detail further, but at the very outset it might be useful to indicate the main component of the Canadian legal research in the area: doubts "as to the status of the Arctic Ocean as high seas"; Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic; "Arctic straight baselines"; the negotiation "of what was to become Article 234" of the UNCLOS: between Canada, the Soviet Union (at that time) and the United States; legal status of the Northwest Passage and the Arctic Cooperation Agreement (Canada-US) of 1988; "the Sector Theory". It would be also commendable to mention a collection of scholarly works Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean edited by P.A. Berkman and A.N. Vylegzhanin (Springer: Dordrecht, 2013). Over twenty authors of the book, mostly foreign scholars,9 have looked into a broad range of matters of legal regulation of the economic and military activities of states in the Arctic,

8 International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied in Canada. Ed. H.M. Kindred. Sixth Edition. Toronto. 2000. P. 420-430.

9 Only five Russian authors are represented in this book: A.N. Chilingarov, A.N. Vylegzhanin, D.V. Vasilevskaya, V.V. Mikhailichenko, I.V. Bunik.

while focusing on the environmental concerns in the Arctic Ocean, common for both Arctic and non-Arctic states.

The most recent scholarly works include an article in English written by three Professors - P. Berkman, A.N. Vylegzhanin, O.R. Young, Application and Interpretation of the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation (Moscow Journal of International Law - 2017, No. 3). The authors are examining the existing problems of international legal management of scientific work in the Arctic, with an emphasis on the analysis of the Agreement of the eight Arctic states on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation of 2017. However, these publications still are not devoted to and do not touch directly upon the international legal issues studied in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law and discussed here.

Theory underlying this study. In writing this study, the author has relied upon the already accumulated level of academic legal knowledge. The theoretic basis for this dissertation is found in the treatises on the general theory of international law, and, first and foremost, those by Yu.G. Barsegov, A.N. Vylegzhanin, G.V. Ignatenko, A.Ya. Kapustin, F.I. Kozhevnikov, Yu.M. Kolosov, G.I. Kurdiukov, M.A. Lazarev, I.I. Lukashuk, B.I. Nefyodov, O.I. Tiunov, G.I. Tunkin, N.A. Ushakov, S.V. Chernichenko, V.M. Shumilov, and M.L. Entin.

The scholarly works of the leading specialists in the international law of the sea and international environmental law are also used, namely, those by K.A. Beryashev, R.M. Valeyev, V.V. Golitsyn, A.L. Kolodkin, M.N. Kopylov, O.S. Kolbasov, V.L. Lakhtin, Yu.N. Maleyev, S.V. Molodtsov, P.V. Savaskov, V.F. Sidorchenko, N.A. Sokolova, G.G. Shinkaretskaya, etc.

Of special importance for a dissertation on this topic was the analysis of the academic works by the following foreign authors on specific international issues of law and policy: P. Berkman, I. Brownlie, M. Shaw, R.V. Corell, J. Crawford, M. Jacobsson, R. Fife, R.V. Arnaudo, V.B. Lausoen, B.M. Magnusson, B. Kunoy, O. Young, etc.

The object of this study comprises the international relations arising from various activities in the Arctic.

The subject-matter of this study consists of the totality of rules and principles of international and domestic law regulating the relations concerning the use of the area and natural resources of the Arctic surface, including islands and rocks, the Arctic Ocean, including its seas, with a focus on the existing and future national interests of the Russian Federation in that region.

The study aims to supply an up-to-date, accurate qualification of the international legal issues of specifying the status of the Arctic Ocean according to Anglo-American doctrines, a critical analysis of such doctrines from the standpoint of the best solutions to those issues, and to produce recommendations for Russia in this regard.

In line with this aim, this work has addressed the following objectives:

- to define the current meaning of the term "international legal doctrines" and "teachings" in order to ascertain the role of Anglo-American doctrines in the evolution of the international law applicable to the Arctic;

- to identify alternative interpretations of the international legal rules applicable to determining the general legal regime of the seabed and surface waters within the Arctic Circle;

- to outline the international legal means for Russia to draw baselines with its neighbouring Arctic states along its Arctic coastline; to substantiate the use by such states of different legal approaches and their respective interpretations in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law, and, based on such findings, to produce theoretical proposals that would allow Russia to implement such foreign practices;

- to identify the approaches to interpreting international legal rules on the delimitation and delineation of Arctic shelf as are set forth in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law, in the context of criticism by Russian international legal scholars of the drastic reversal of Russia's Arctic legal policy during President B.N. Yeltsin's term;

- to give a legal characteristic to the positions of two of Russia's neighbouring Arctic states on the delimitation of the outer boundaries of their Arctic shelf, in the context of the assessment of such positions in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law;

- to establish the current substance of the most advanced mechanisms of international environmental law applicable to the protection of the Arctic environment (including mechanisms of environmental impact assessment (hereinafter, the EIA), precautionary principle, and ecosystem management) in the context of interpretation of such mechanisms in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law.

Methodology and methods used. The methodology underlying this study comprises the dialectic method of acquiring verifiable knowledge, methods and techniques of formal logic, as well as specialized methods, namely the historical, comparative legal, systemic and structural, and formal legal methods.

The empirical basis of the study included international legal documents, and, first of all, international treaties, both universal, regional and bilateral, regulating interstate relations in the Arctic; acts of the Arctic Council, other international fora and organisations; judgments of the International Court of Justice, other courts and arbitral tribunals; and, domestic legal acts of the Arctic states formulating their Arctic policy.

A comparative analysis of non-binding "soft law" sources has been carried out, namely, the resolutions of the UN General Assembly; the acts adopted by the Arctic Council, other international organisations and conferences, including the 2015 Declaration Concerning the Prevention of Unregulated High Seas Fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean.

This study contributes to the existing scholarship, as it is the first Russian comprehensive monograph on international law examining the Anglo-American international legal doctrines on the status of the Arctic, addressing the issues related to specifying the existing legal regime of the seabed within the Arctic Circle and the surface waters, including those that remain ice-bound for most of

the year; the baselines along the Arctic coastline; the issues of delineation and delimitation of the Arctic shelf; the applicability to the Arctic region of the best available mechanisms of protecting the environment under international law, in the context of climate change in the region and the ever-pressing need to ensure environmental safety in the Arctic Ocean, including its seas.

The dissertation supplies a number of theoretical propositions and practical recommendations, which, taken together, can be viewed as a solution to an outstanding scholarly challenge:

- the effect of the Anglo-American doctrines of international law on the legal policy of Russia's neighbouring Arctic states is demonstrated;

- the theoretical summaries of the practice of foreign states related to drawing baselines along the Arctic coast as set out in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law are formulated;

- the international legal means and methods of protecting the national interests of the Arctic states as regards the boundaries of their Arctic shelf are defined;

- interpretations of the treaties applicable to specifying the current legal status of the Arctic Ocean floor from the standpoint of the Anglo-American doctrines of international law are suggested;

- new trends in improving the environmental protection regime of the Arctic in light of the Anglo-American doctrines of international law are outlined;

- the legal commentaries, available in the Anglo-American doctrine, to the legal means of preventing unregulated high seas fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean are assessed;

- the recommendations to improve the international legal mechanisms of protecting the national interests of the Russian Federation with respect to the high-latitude Arctic shelf, using selected arguments proffered by the Anglo-American doctrines of international law, including recommendations to prevent losses of areas of such shelf within the Russian Arctic sector (that the Russian Government abandoned under the new Arctic legal policy announced in 1997) are worked out.

Some international agreements of the Arctic States treaties and other international legal sources, as well as the acts of domestic law related to the issues in question, are introduced by me into the Russian legal scholarship for the first time.

The study has allowed me to submit the following propositions for defence:

1. Russian-language and English-language scholarship on international law understand the term "teachings of the most highly qualified publicists" used in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice (hereinafter, the ICJ) differently. The Anglo-American international legal literature draws a distinction between such teachings and regular academic publications on international law. Whereas the latter are regarded as a rather broad category encompassing the results of any research in international law published in academic titles by any author whatsoever, the former category only includes the academic publications that are extensively cited. Such a clear distinction is absent in the Russian international legal scholarship, despite an objective need for it.

2. The influence of the Anglo-American international law doctrines on the international legal Arctic policy of Russia's neighbouring Arctic states is by far greater than that of the Soviet and Russian international law doctrines on the current international legal policy of the Russian Federation in the Arctic. The legal propositions formulated in the Arctic policies of Russia's neighbours in the Arctic region generally go through an analytical appraisal, starting from theoretical discussions at specialist fora to scholarly publications and, eventually, to finding their way into the legal documents of a state or several states. The legal documents of the Government of the Russian Federation, and Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, especially since 1997, including such acts significant to the national interests of the Russian Federation as those stipulating the dramatic abandonment of the prima facie boundaries of Russia's Arctic shelf laid down by the 1867 Treaty and the 1926 Resolution of the Presidium of the USSR Central Executive Committee (hereinafter, the USSR

CEC), have effectively cancelled the international legal doctrine of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union in terms of sectoral (meridian) delimitation of the sovereign powers as regards the floor of the Arctic Ocean, while only selectively taking into account the scholarly publications on international law of a later period. This drastic change in Russia's international legal position was left unnoticed in the Anglo-American doctrines.

3. The artificial insistence, during B.N. Yeltsin's years and thus starting from 1997, on the relevance of the 1982 UNCLOS to the already established status of the Arctic, and, primarily, the emphasis on the applicability to the Arctic of its Part XI ("the Area") and Article 76 (on delineation between the area and the continental shelf), instead of the legal opportunities that the sectoral delimitation of the Arctic shelf had offered, resulted not only in a loss by Russia of a part of its shelf within its Arctic sector, but also to the prevailing support for that approach in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law, especially after the release of NATO, EU and U.S. documents on their Arctic policy. Interestingly, that new approach has produced adverse legal consequences since 1997 not only for Russia: thus, а) instead of legal certainty as to the long-established meridian boundaries of the Arctic shelf running to the North geographical pole, the Arctic states found themselves forced to determine those boundaries using the new geological, distance-based, and geomorphological criteria provided in Article 76 of the 1982 UNCLOS, previously untested as the underlying criteria for the legal regime of the Arctic; b) instead of stability and good neighbourly relations between Arctic states, four of them ended up competing with each other in proving to the technical international body under the UNCLOS - that is, the CLCS - on what geological or other grounds their shelf overlapped with the Arctic sector of adjacent states. The Anglo-American legal literature uses the terms "war for the Arctic shelf" and "battle between Arctic states" to describe this new situation.

4. The Anglo-American international law doctrines contain different qualifications of the concession made during Gorbachev's perestroika which caused the USSR to disavow its former doctrinal Soviet position that the Kara Sea,

the Laptev Sea and the East Siberian Sea were the Soviet Union's internal waters on historical grounds. The USSR Government's drawing of baselines (both straight and normal) along the entire Arctic coast in 1985 was embraced in a number of Anglo-American scholarly commentaries, especially as regards normal baselines, while other works dismissed them in solidarity with the U.S. position that criticizes some of such straight baselines. At the same time, the Anglo-American doctrines do not doubt that Norway's, Denmark's (north of Greenland) and Canada's exclusively straight baselines along the Arctic coastline are consistent with international law. Against this doctrinal background, it appears feasible to recommend that the Government of the Russian Federation draw only straight baselines along Russia's Arctic coast; as the first step to that effect, I propose drawing straight baselines along the coasts of the islands of the Franz Josef Land archipelago, taking into account the Norwegian method of drawing straight baselines along the Spitzbergen islands that elicited no criticism in the Anglo-American doctrines of international law.

5. The Anglo-American international law doctrines do not conflate the notion of "delimitation" of the continental shelf (that is, drawing a boundary line between the shelf belonging to the neighbouring states) with the notion of "delineation", that is, drawing the outer limit of the shelf separating it from the international seabed area. An analysis of such doctrines has allowed me to identify arguments in favour of the legal possibility of delimiting the Arctic shelf between Russia and other Arctic states beyond 200 miles off the baselines without "delineation", i.e. without addressing the CLCS and, accordingly, without the loss of shelf within Russia's Arctic sector, already evident from Russia's 2001 and 2015 filings with the Commission.

6. In the context of development of the international legal environmental regulation of human activities in the Arctic for the purposes of preserving its unique ecosystem, use of the resources based on the redefined role of that region for Arctic states and for the whole of the global community, and taking into account the large-scale climate change, globalization and proliferation of economic

activities in the Arctic and the Arctic Ocean with its adjacent seas, the region can no longer be viewed as a marginal object of international law. Development of commercial activities in the Arctic and, consequently, their legal regulation should be subjected to social and ecological interests, with the aim of increasing the welfare of the population of the Arctic states, including their indigenous peoples. This should underlie Russia's long-term position in the Arctic Council, expressed, in particular, in its documents aimed at ensuring sustainable development in the Arctic.

7. From the standpoint of practice, there is a need for a new philosophical and legal concept of sustainable development that would correspond to the unique geographic and geopolitical position of the Arctic, its environment and international legal status, which is, at present, only scarcely found in the Anglo-American international law doctrines. This new concept should, while reflecting the current substance of the global concept of sustainable development, also encompass various tasks and concerns affecting the population of the Arctic states and the global community as a whole, and should contain the parameters of evaluation of the environmental protection progress in specific areas, first and foremost, for the purposes of conserving Arctic ecosystems in parallel with sustainable economic growth in the regions coastal to the Arctic Ocean seas.

8. Elaboration of an up-to-date international legal concept of sustainable development of the Arctic, already outlined in the Anglo-American international law doctrines, would be prospective if it is consolidated and aimed at the meaningful improvement of the work of the Arctic Council, at uniting the social and ecological, and economic components of this concept so as to resolve the problems specific to the Arctic Region, with the interests of the inhabitants of the Arctic, their health, welfare and balanced development placed at the cornerstone of this process.

9. In view of the wide-scale climate change in the Arctic, including the phenomenon of reduction of the surface area of all-season ice, it is feasible to develop special international legal rules to govern the economic activities in that

part of the globe, including based on the regulation mechanisms proposed in the Western international law doctrines, such as conserving Arctic ecosystems; social matters, including the preservation of the traditional life, language and culture of the indigenous peoples of the North; ensuring safety at sea in the context of intensifying Arctic navigation, fisheries and maritime oil and gas extraction. At the same time, it would be reasonable to dismiss the prevailing Anglo-American doctrinal ideas of borrowing regulation from other parts of the World Ocean reflected in treaty and non-treaty rules that might not serve as an adequate legal framework to solve the abovementioned issues in the unique conditions of the Arctic, since they emerged in different political, legal, geographical, climatic, social and cultural circumstances.

10. The most sought-after and fairly efficient legal mechanism for reconciling economic, social and ecological interests with economic activities available thus far, namely, the environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure, as it exists for the regions of the Indian, Pacific, and Atlantic Oceans, cannot be automatically transplanted to the Arctic legal regime. The nature of the Arctic remains understudied, and in light of the ongoing rapid climate change, there is essentially no representative scientific data for assessment, projections and analysis of the potential consequences of any major economic project for the environment, as required for an EIA. Another serious impediment for conducting EIA in the Arctic is the requirement to involve the local population, which is a key component of the procedure itself. In that context, the Western lawyers' suggestions on a pan-Arctic impact assessment procedure based on the mechanisms used in other regions, appear untenable. It is necessary to substantially revise the legal content of that procedure, including the methods of monitoring; to adapt them to the specific conditions of the Arctic; and, most importantly, to replace the traditional EIA that focuses on one particular object, with a strategic ecological assessment of multi-object and space-specific nature.

11. A study of a wide selection of treaty and non-treaty sources of international law, cases and scholarly publications by Western lawyers indicates

the need for wider application in regulating any activity in the Arctic, including navigation, fishing, production of oil and gas, tourism, of the precautionary principle (or the precautionary approach), whose key premises are found in the UNCLOS, the Biodiversity Convention, and the guidelines of the Arctic Council. Where climate change unravels at a quick pace, and its social and economic effects, including on the global scale, remain unpredictable, it becomes all the more urgent to develop an international legal mechanism of implementing this principle specifically in the Arctic Region.

12. The optimal way to preserve the nature of the Arctic, to rationally manage natural resources in the Arctic Region and to unwind rational economic activity in the Arctic, is to regulate it within the ecosystem-based approach. The Anglo-American doctrine of international law has no unequivocal perception of the legal meaning of the international legal rules on the ecosystem-based approach. It appears that the most promising concept is that developed by Professor O.R. Young, consisting in a new social and ecological paradigm, "the world of ecosystems dominated by man"; that in the Arctic, we are dealing precisely with a special "social and ecological system", whose dynamics are defined both by biophysical and social processes, including law-making and law enforcement. Consequently, it is reasonable to steer the Arctic Council towards elaborating a comprehensive legal model of regional ecosystem management of the Arctic, where man and his activity would be a harmoniously integrated part of the ecosystem, while its sustainable use, along with preserving its valuable qualities and functions, would be placed at the centre of the internationally negotiated regime of managing the Arctic environment.

Список литературы диссертационного исследования доктор наук Журавлева Инна Петровна, 2019 год

480 References

1. International treaties and other international law documents

1. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. 1982. A Commentary. Volumes I-VI. Editor-in-Chief M.H. Nordquist. General Editors S.N. Nandan and S. Rosenne. As. Editor N.R. Grandy. Ed. by M.C. Allen. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. Dordrecht/Boston/London. 1985-1992.

2. Agreement Concerning the Bering Straits Regional Commission // International Legal Materials. Vol. 28. № 6 (November 1989).

3. Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, December 2, 1980.

4. AMAP (2010) Persistent Organic Pollutant (POPs) in the Arctic. // Sci Total Environ 408 (Special Issue).

5. Canada Treaty Series 1988/29. Ottawa, 1989.

6. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Distr.: General. 7 September 2005.

7. European Code of Conduct for Coastal Zones. Committee for the Activities of the Council of Europe in the Field of Biological and Landscape Diversity. 3rd meeting, Geneva, 19 April 1999, CO-DBP (99) 11.

8. Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), June 30, 1948, as amended on June 20, 1961, October 18, 1972 and October 19, 1999

9. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary/Slovakia), Judgment, ICJ Reports 1997. ICJ Reports 1982.

10. ICJ Reports 1949.

11. ICJ Reports. 1969.

12. Joint Statement of Ministers on the Occasion of the first White House Arctic Science Ministerial. 28 September 2016. Washington, DC, USA.

13. Key Documents and Research Materials in International Law. Ed. by Z. Hafez. William S. Hein and Co., Inc. Buffalo, New York. 2008.

14. Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua intervening), 1992 ICJ Reports 351, 607, para. 417.

15. Materials of the International Conference for the Protection of Fish Stocks and Other Marine Animals. Vol. II М. 1957.

16. Note verbale. Madrid, 2nd March 2007, Ministerio de Asuntos exteriors y de Cooperation.

17. Official Records of the UN General Assembly. Ninth Session. Supplement № 21 А (2890).

18. Oil Terminal and Oil Tanker Environmental Oversight and Monitoring Act, (Monitoring Act), August 18, 1990.

19. Permanent Mission of Denmark to the United Nations. Ref. № 119. № 8. New York, 24. January 2007.

20. Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations. № 82. New York, February 21, 2007.

21. Press conference of Prime Minister Trudeau. April 8, 1970 // 9 Int. Legal materials 601 (1970).

22. Proclamation on the Territorial Sea of the United States of America by the President, 27 December 1989. Law of the Sea Bulletin №12 (Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Office of Legal Affairs, UN).

23. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay), Judgment, ICJ Reports 2010.

24. Report of the International Technical Conference on the Conservation of the Living Resources of the Sea. Rome, 18 April-10 May 1955. A/Conf.10/6.

25. Resolution of the Government of Russia "On the Procedure for Approving Lists of Geographical Coordinates of the Points Defining the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation" № 717 dated 16 June 1997.

26. Statement Series 85/49. 10.09.1985 at 3.

27. Territorial Sea Geographical Coordinates (Area 7) Order, S.O.R./85-872 // Canada Gazette Part II, Vol. 119, № 20, at 3996 (10 Sept. 1985).

28. The International Map of the World (IMW) series according to United Nations specifications. - Geomatics Canada, Natural Resources Canada; United States Geological Survey (USGS). See, i.e., the website of Canada's Government at http//atlas.gc.ca/ site/Engli sh/maps.

29. Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Doc.A/C0NF.62/WS/37; Add.1-2.

30. Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Doc.A/CONF.62/WS/37; Add.1-2.

31. Treaties and international agreements registered or filed and recorded with the Secretariat of the United Nations. United Nations. New York. 2005. Vol. 2262.

32. UN Conference on Straddling Stocks and HMS. Closing Statement of Ambassador S.N. Nandan. New York. 30 July 1993.

33. UN ILC. Documents of the Second Session Including the Report of the Commission to the General Assembly. Note 34.

34. Uniform Interpretation of Rules of International Law Governing Innocent Passage // Collected treaties of the USSR. № 45. Moscow. 1991.

35. United Nations. Canada: Notifications regarding the submission made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf./CLCS.01.2001.L0S/CAN.26 February 2002.

36. United Nations. Denmark: "Notification regarding the submission made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Reference: CLCS.01.2001.L0S/DNK. 26 February 2002.

37. United Nations. Norway: "Notification regarding the submission made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Reference: CLCS.01.2001.L0S/N0R. 2 April 2002.

38. United Nations. United States of America: "Notification regarding the submission made by the Russian Federation to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. Reference: CLCS.01.2001.L0S/USA. 18 March 2002.

39. United States Coast Guard. Arctic Strategy. May 2013. Washington,

D.C.

40. Vessel Traffic Services, Centre Manual, Arctic Canada Traffic System (NORDREG), Element T-2, June 1994. TP 1526, as well as Ship Safety Bulletins, № 05/1997.

41. Yearbook of the International Law Commission. 1956. Vol. II. 2. Legal publications in English

42. A/CONF.62/L.76 (1981), XV off. Rec. 153, 169.

43. Adopted by UN General Assembly Resolution 61/295 dated 13 September 2007.

44. Akehurt's Modern Introduction to International law. Seventh Revised Edition. by P. Malanczuk, Routledge. London and New York. 1997.

45. Alaska and the New Maritime Arctic. Conference Report. Ed. Brigham L. W. University of Alaska Fairbanks. 2014.

46. Ana G. López Martín. International Straits: Concept, Classification and Rules of Passage. Springer. 2010.

47. Andrew Hartsig, Ivy Fredrickson, Carmen Yeung and Stan Senner. Arctic bottleneck: protecting the Bering Strait region from increased vessel traffic. // Ocean and Coastal law Journal", Vol. 18:1. 2014.

48. Arbitration between Barbados and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago (Barbados v. Republic of Trinidad and Tobago). Arbitration Tribunal. 2006. 45 ILM 800, 835. Para. 217.

49. Arctic Law and Policy Year in Review: 2017. / Washington Journal of International Law and Policy. 2018.

50. Berkman P.A., Kullerud L., Pope A., Vylegzhanin A., Young O. The Arctic Science Agreement propels science diplomacy. // Science. 3 November 2017. Vol. 358. Issue 6363.

51. Birnie P., Boyle A. International law and the Environment. Oxford.

52. Birnie P.W., Boyle A.E. Environmental law and Environment. Oxford University Press, New York. 1994.

53. Blake G.H. Maritime boundaries. / The Oceans: Key Issues in Marine Affairs, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Ed. H.D. Smith. Printed in the Netherlands.

54. Borgese E.M. The oceanic circle: Governing the seas as a global resource. - United Nations University Press, 1998.

55. Bridges J.W., Bridges O. Hormones as growth promoters; the precautionary principle or a political risk assessment. The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century. Ed. by P. Harremoes and others. London, 2002.

56. Brown E.D. The International Law of the Sea. Vol. I. Dartmouth Publishing Company. - Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean. Ed. by P.A. Berkman and A.N. Vylegzhanin. Springer. Dordrecht. 2013.

57. Brussard P.F., Reed M.J., Richard T.C. Ecosystem Management: What is it really? // Landscape and Urban Planning. 1998. Vol. 40.

58. Building resilience through interlocal relations: Case studies of polar bear and walrus management in the Bering Strait / Chanda L. Meek [and others] // Marine Policy. - 2008. - V.32. № 6.

59. Burke William T. Unregulated high seas fishing and ocean governance. \\ J.M. Van Dyke, D. Zaelke and G. Hewison (eds.). Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century: Ocean Governance and Environmental Harmony. - Washington, DC, Covelo, California, Island Press, 1993.

60. Buzan B.G., Middlemiss D.W. Canadian Foreign Policy and Exploitation of the Seabed. - Canadian Foreign Policy and the Law of the Sea. Eds. B. Johnson and M.W. Zacher. Vancouver: University of Britain Columbia Press, 1977.

61. Byers M. International Law and the Arctic. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. UK. New York. USA. 2013.

62. Carman J.C. Economic and strategic implications of ice-free arctic seas. / Tangredi S.J. (ed.) Globalization and maritime power. National Defense University Press Washington, DC, (2002).

63. Carty A. Philosophy of International law. Second edition. Edinburgh University Press. 2017.

64. Cherp A., Partidario M.R. and Arts J. From formulation to implementation: strengthening SEA through follow-up Handbook of Strategic Environmental Assessment. Ed. by S. Barry, R. Aschemann, J. Dusik, T.B. Fischer, M.R. Partidario and R. Verheem. London: Earthscan, 2011.

65. Churchill R.R. Lowe A.V. The Law of the Sea. Manchester University Press. 1999.

66. Churchill R.R., Lowe A.V. The Law of the Sea. 3rd edition. Manchester University Press. 1999.

67. Cohen A. From Russian Competition to Natural resources access: Recasting U.S. Arctic Policy. June 15. 2010.

68. Collins, Harry M. Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act - Matrix for United States Deep Seabed Mining; 13 Nat. Resources Law. 571 (1980-1981).

69. Colson D. The Delimitation of the Outer Continental Shelf between Neighboring States / American Journal of International Law. 2003.

70. Conference Report. Anchorage, Alaska. November 6-7, 2013. Ed. Brigham L.W.

71. Corell R.W. Consequences of the Changes across the Arctic on World order, the North Pacific Nations, and Regional and Global governance. / The Arctic in Word affairs. Ed. by R.W. Corell, J.S.-C. Kang, Y.H. Kim. East-West Center. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. 2013.

72. Crawford J. Brownlie's Principles of Public International Law. Eighth Edition. Oxford University Press. 2012.

73. Current Developments in Arctic Law, Vol. 6, 2018, University of Lapland.

74. Current Legal Developments, International Maritime 0rganization. International Journal of Estuarine & Coastal Law, 44 (1988).

75. D. Freestone. The Conservation of Marine Ecosystems under International Law. - In: International Law and the Conservation of Biological Diversity. Eds.: M. Bowman and C. Redgwell. Kluwer Law International. London - The Hague - Boston. 1996.

76. Dispute Concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Bangladesh and Myanmar in the Bay of Bengal (Bangladesh v. Myanmar). Judgment. 2012. Para. 394.

77. Dixon M. and McCorquodale R. Cases and Materials on International Law. 0xford University Press. 0xford/New York. 2003.

78. Donald R. Rothwell. The United States and Arctic Straits. The Northwest Passage and the Bering Strait. International Law and Policies of the Arctic 0cean. Essays in Honour of D. Pharand. Leiden. 2015.

79. Drexhage J. and Murphy D. Sustainable Development from Brundtland to Rio 2012. Background Paper prepared for consideration by the High-Level Panel on Global Sustainability at its first meeting, 19 September 2010. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), 2010.

80. Ristroph. E.B. Loosening Lips to Avoid Sinking Ships: Designing a Ship Communications System for the Bering Strait Region. / Indiana International & Comparative Law Review. Vol. 24. N 3. 2014.

81. Eiriksson G. The Case of Disagreement between a Coastal State and the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf. M. Nordquist et al. (eds). Legal and Scientific Aspects of Continental Shelf Limits. Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff. 2004.

82. Elferink A., Johnson C. Submissions to the CLCS in Cases of Unresolved Land and Maritime Disputes: the Significance of Article 76 (10) of the L0S Convention / Paper presented at SLS and BIICL Symposium on the Law of the Sea. London. 22 - 23 March 2005.

83. Elferink A.G.O. The outer limits of the Continental shelf in the Polar region. / The Law of the Sea and Polar Regions. Eds. E. J. Molenar, A.G.O. Elferink and D.R. Rothwell. Leiden. Boston. 2013.

84. Environmental Management for Business. By Linda S. Spedding. John Willy & Sons. 1996.

85. F. de Hartingh. Les conceptions sovietiques du droit de la mer. Preface par A. Gros. Paris. 1960.

86. Federal Environmental Law. 999th ed. West Group 1999, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 4321 to 4370b.

87. Floit Catherine. Reconsidering Freedom of the High Seas: Protection of Living Marine Resources on the High Seas \\ J.M. Van Dyke, D. Zaelke and G. Hewison (eds.), Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century: Ocean Governance and Environmental Harmony. - Washington, DC, Covelo, California, Island Press, 1993.

88. Freestone D. The conservation of Marine Ecosystems under International Law / International Law and the Conservation of Biological Diversity. Eds. M. Bowman and C. Redgwell. Kluwer Law International. London, The Hague, Boston. 1996.

89. Gacheciladze M., Noble B.F. and Bitter B.W. Following up in strategic environmental assessment: a case study of 20-year forest management planning in Saskatchewan. // Canada Impact Assess. Project Appraisal. 2009. Vol. 27.

90. Gacheciladze-Bozhesku M. Towards improving strategic environmental assessment follow-up through stakeholder participation: a case of the Pasquia-Porcupine forest management plan, Saskatchewan, Canada J. Environ. Plann. Manag. 2012. Vol. 55.

91. Gautier D.L. and Pierce B.S. Circum-Arctic Resource Appraisal: Estimates of Undiscovered Oil and Gas North of the Arctic Circle. For the U.S. Geological Survey. 23 July 2008.

92. Gee D. and Greenberg M. Asbestos: from "magic" to malevolent mineral. / The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century. Ed. by P. Harremoes and others. London, 2002

93. George F. Extraterritorial Application of Penal Legislation // 64 Michigan L.R. 609 (1966); Cowles D. Universal of Jurisdiction Over War Crimes //33 CALIF. L. REV. 177 (1945); Carnegie, Jurisdiction Over Violations of the Laws and Customs of War // 39 BRIT. Y.B. INT'L.L. 402 (1963).

94. Gilbertson M. Early warnings of chemical contamination of the Great Lakes. / The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century. Ed. by P. Harremoes and others. London, 2002.

95. Guide to Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy. (Eds. N. Mirovitskaya and W. Ascher. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 2001.

96. Guyana and Suriname (Guyana v. Suriname) Arbitration Tribunal. 2007. 47. ILM 166, 215, para. 353.

97. Hanusch M. and Glasson J. Much ado about SEA/SA monitoring: the performance of English regional spatial strategies, and some German comparisons. // Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2008. Vol. 28.

98. Hilden M. and Furman E.R. Assessment across borders Stumbling blocks and options in the practical implementation of the Espoo Convention. // Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2001. Vol. 21.

99. Huebert R. Polar vision or tunnel vision: the making of Canadian Arctic policy. Marine Policy 19 (4) (1995).

100. International Environmental Law. Primary Materials. Ed. by M.R. Molitor. Kluwer. Deventer. Boston. 1991.

101. International Law Chiefly as Interpreted and Applied in Canada. Ed. H.M. Kindred. Sixth Edition. Toronto. 2000.

102. International Straits and Trans-Arctic Navigation // Ocean Development & International Law. - 2012. - № 43.

103. J.M. Van Dyke. International Governance and Stewardship of the High Seas and Its Resources \\ J.M. Van Dyke, D. Zaelke and G. Hewison (eds.).

Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century: Ocean Governance and Environmental Harmony. - Washington, DC, Covelo, California, Island Press, 1993.

104. John C. Klotz. Are Ocean Polluters Subject to Universal Jurisdiction -Canada Breaks the Ice. // The International Lawyer, Vol.6, № 4, October 1972,

105. Kamto M. Droit international de la gouvernance. Editions A. Pedone. Paris. 2013.

106. Kirchner A. (Ed). International Maritime Environmental Law: Institutions, Implementation and Innovations. The Hague. 2003.

107. Koivurova T. and Holiencin F. Demilitation and Neutralisation of Svalbard: how has the Svalbard regime been able to meet the changing security realities during almost 100 years of existence?/ Polar Record. P. 1-12. Cambridge University Press. 2017.

108. Koivurova T. Governance of protected areas in the Arctic // 2009. 5 Utrecht Law Review.

109. Koivurova T., Molenaar E. International Governance and Regulation of the Marine Arctic. Oslo. WWF. 2009.

110. Kynoy B. The Admissibility of a Plea to an International Adjudicative Forum to Delimit the Outer Continental Shelf Prior to the Adoption of Final Recommendations by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf / The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law. 2010 (25).

111. Lakhtin V.L. Prava na severnye polyarnye prostranstva [Title to the Northern Polar Territories]. Izdanie Litizdata Narodnogo Komissariata po Inostrannym Delam. M. 1928.

112. Lock D. (ed.). The Gower Handbook of Management. 4th ed. England, USA, 1998.

113. Lundberg K., Balfors B., Folkeson L. and Nilsson M. SEA monitoring in Swedish regional transport infrastructure plans—improvement opportunities identified in practical experience. // Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2010. Vol. 30.

114. MacGibbon I.C. The Scope of Acquiescence in International Law. -British Year Book of International Law, Vol. 31, 1954.

115. Magnusson B. Is there a Temporal Relationship between the Delimitation and the Delineation of the Continental Shelf beyond 200 Nautical Miles? / The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law. 2013. № 28.

116. Magnusson B.M. The Continental Shelf beyond 200 Nautical Miles. Delineation. Delimitation and Dispute Settlement. Leiden, Boston: Brill Nijhoff, 2015.

117. McLeod K., Leslie H.M. (eds.) (2009) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island Press, Washington, DC.

118. Miller D.H. Political Rights in the Arctic. Foreign Affairs, 1925, V. 4,

№ 1.

119. Minh N.N. International Law of the Sea. Translated from Vietnamese by G.G. Shinkaretskaya. Ed. by Yu.G. Barsegov. Moscow: Progress.1981.

120. Moomaw W.R., Verkooijen P., Agarwal P. The Future of the Paris Climate Agreement: Carbon Pricing as a Pathway to Climate Sustainability. / The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs. Power in Partnerships. Cooperation in a Fragmented World. Winter 2017, Vol. 41:1

121. Morrison A. Coming in from the Cold War: Arctic Security in the Emerging Global Climate: A View from Canada.

122. Ocean Yearbook. Pacem in Maribus. Ed. by E.M. Borgese and N. Ginsburg. Chicago and London. 1978.

123. Olson C.L., Selle R. W. U.S.-Russian Boundary Giveaway. "Orbis". V.42. Winter, 1998.

124. Oppenheim's International Law. V. L. Pease. Introd. and Part 1 / R. Jennings, A. Watts (Eds.). - 9th ed. - London: Longman, 1996.

125. Oran Young. Creating Regimes. Arctic accords and International Governance. - N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1998.

126. OSPAR - Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North - East Atlantic, 1992. Lalonde S.

127. Owens J. The Legal regime of the Bering Strait // China Oceans Law Review. - 2011. - № 2.

128. P.K. Gautam. Mapping Chinese Oil and Gas Pipelines and Sea Routes. Strategic Analysis. - July 2011. - V. 35. № 4.

129. Partidario M.R. and Fischer T.B. Follow-up in current SEA understanding Assessing Impact: Handbook of EIA and SEA Follow-Up. Ed. by A. Morrison-Saunders and J. Arts. London: Earthscan, 2004.

130. Paul Arthur Berkman, Alexander N. Vylegzhanin, Oran R. Young. Governing the Bering Strait Region: Current Status, Emerging Issues and Future Options // Ocean Development & International Law. - 2016. - V. 47. № 2.

131. Pharand D. Canada's Arctic Waters in International Law. Cambridge.

1988.

132. Polar Politics. Creating International Environmental Regimes. Ed. by Oran R. Young, Gail Osherenko. - N. Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993.

133. Policy Brief N 4. Arctic Climate Change. Economy and Society. By L. Brigham.

134. Reid I. The Canadian Claim to Sovereignty over the Waters of the Arctic / 12 Canadian Yearbook of International Law, III, 1974.

135. Report on the Goals and Objectives for Arctic Research 2015-2016 for the US Research Program Plan. Washington, DC. 2015.

136. Ristroph E. B. Loosening Lips to Avoid Sinking Ships: Designing a Ship Communications System for the Bering Strait Region // Indiana International & Comparative Law Review. - 2014. - V. 24. № 3.

137. Rolf Einar Fife, Kristian Jervell. Elements of Nordic Practice 2000: Norway, Nordic Journal of International Law 70: 2001.

138. Rothwell D.R. (1993) The Canadian-U.S. northwest passage dispute: a reassessment. Cornell International Law Journal 26 (2)ro

139. Rothwell D.R., Joyner C.C. The Polar Oceans and the Law of the Sea. / The Law of the Sea and Polar Maritime Delimitation and Jurisdiction. Ed. by A.O. Elferink and D.R. Rothwell. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. The Hague /New York/ London. 2001.

140. Salehyan I. From climate change to conflict. No consensus yet. // Journal of Peace Research (2008) 45 (3).

141. Schwarzenberger G. A Manual of International law. Fourth edition. London. New York. Vol 1. 1960.

142. Shaw M.N. International Law. 4th Ed. Cambridge University Press.

1977.

143. Shaw M.N. International Law. Eighth Edition. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, UK. New York. USA. 2017.

144. Smedal G. Acquisition of Sovereignty over Polar Areas. Oslo. Translated from Norwegian. 1931.

145. Spedding L.S. Environmental Management for Business. John Willy & Sons. 1996.

146. Speth J.G., Haas P.M. Global Environmental Governance. - Wash.: Island Press, 2006.

147. Steele H. Policing the Arctic. Jarrolds Publishers. London. 1936.

148. Stroeve J., Holland M., Meier W., Scambos T., Serreze M. (2007) Arctic sea ice decline: Faster than forecast. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 34, L09501, doi:10, 1029/2007GL029703.

149. Szaro R., Sexton W.T., Malone C.R. The emergence of ecosystem management as a tool for meeting people's needs and sustaining ecosystems. // Landscape and Urban Planning. 1998. Vol. 40.

150. Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua and Honduras in the Caribbean Sea (Nicaragua v. Honduras). Judgment. 2007. ICJ Rep. 659, 759. Para. 319.

151. The Arctic in World Affairs. A North Pacific Dialogue on the Future of the Arctic. Ed. by O. Young, J. Kim, Y. Kim. 2013 North Pacific Arctic Conference Proceedings. KMI and East-West Center. Published in December 2013. Honolulu. USA.

152. The Oceans: Key Issues in Marine Affairs/Ed. By H.D. Smith. Dordrecht/Boston/London. 2004.

153. The Precautionary Principle in the 20th Century. Ed. by P. Harremoes and others. London, 2002.

154. The Work of the International Law Commission. Third Edition. United Nations. New York. 1980.

155. UN Office for Affairs and the Law of the Sea, Baselines: An Examination of the Relevant Provisions of the UNCLOS, Appendix I (Glossary of Technical Terms), at 47, 58. UN Sales № E 88. V. 5. 1989.

156. Vallega A. Sustainable Ocean Governance. A geographical perspective.

- N.Y., L.: Routledge, 2001.

157. Vidas D. (Ed). Protecting the Polar Marine Environment Law and Policy for Pollution Prevention. Cambridge. 2007.

158. Wallgren O., Nilsson N., Jonsson D.K. and Wiklund H. Confronting SEA with real planning: the case of follow-up in regional plans and programmes in Sweden // J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag. 2011. Vol. 13.

159. Wanerman R. Freezing out noncompliant ships: why the Arctic Council must enforce the Polar Code // Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law.

- 2015. - V. 47.

160. Warnaby G., Alexander A., Medway D. (1998), Town center management in the UK: a review, synthesis and research agenda, The International Review of Retail Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 8 №1, 1998.

161. Wenk M.S. The European Union's Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS). Springer, 2005.

162. Yoshifumi Tanaka. A dual approach to ocean governance. The cases of zonal and integrated management in the international law of the sea. - Bodmin: The Ashgate international law series, 2008.

163. Zellen B.S. Arctic doom, Arctic boom: the geopolitics of climate change in the Arctic. Praeger, Santa Barbara (2009).

164. Berkman P.A., Vylegzhanin A.N., Young O.R. «Baseline of Russian Arctic Laws». Springer, 2019.

3. Publications in Russian

165. Vylegzhanin A.N. Resheniya mezhdunarodnogo suda OON po sporam o razgranichenii morskih prostranstv [Judgments of the International Court of Justice on Disputes relating to the Delimitation of Maritime Spaces]. Moscow: Yuridicheskaya literatura. 2004.

166. Anashkin V.M. Mezhdunarodno-pravovye problemy atomnogo sudokhodstva [International Legal Issues of Nuclear-Powered Navigation]. - L.: Izd-vo Leningr. un-ta, 1987.

167. Andreeva E.E., Kukushkina A.V. Sovremennye pravovye mekhanizmy, obespechivayushchie sochetanie sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh i ekonomicheskikh interesov [Contemporary Legal Mechanisms Ensuring the Combination of SocioEconomic and Economic Interests]. / Mezhdunarodnoe parvo [International Law]. MGIMO MID Rossii. Ed. by A.N. Vylegzhanin. Vol. 2. М. 2015.

168. Arctic ocean's decisive role in the conservation of marine fish stocks in the high seas in Bekyashev K.A. Arctic ocean i pravovye voprosy okhrany zhivykh resursov otkrytogo morya [The Arctic ocean and the Legal Issues of Protecting Living Resources of the High Seas]. М. 1976.

169. Barsegov Yu.G., Mogilevkin I.M. et al. Arktika: interesy Rossii i mezhdunarodnye usloviya ikh realizatsii [The Arctic: Russia's Interests and the International Conditions of Their Realisation]. М.: Nauka. 2002.

170. Berkman P., Vylegzhanin A., Young O. Application and Interpretation of the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation./ Moscow Journal of International Law. № 3. 2017.

171. Golitsyn V.V. Antarktika: tendentsii razvitiya rezhima [The Antarctica: Tendencies in the Development of the Regime]. М. 1989.

172. Grabar' V.E. Materialy k istorii literatury mezhdunarodnogo prava v Rossii (1647-1917) [Materials to the History of Literature on International Law in Russia (1647-1917)]. Reprinted. Zerkalo. М. 2005.

173. Gureev S.A. and Bunik I.V. O neobkhodimosti podtverzhdeniya i pravovogo zakrepleniya isklyuchitel'nykh prav Rossii v Arktike [On the Need to Confirm and Legally Fix Russia's Exclusive Rights in the Arctic]. - Morskaya deyatel'nost' Rossiiskoi Federatsii: sostoyanie i problemy zakonodatel'nogo obespecheniya [Maritime Activities of the Russian Federation: State and Issues of Legislative Implementation]. Ed by. V.A. Popov. Moscow. 2005.

174. Kolodkin A.L. Pravovoi rezhim territorial'nykh vod i otkrytogo moray [The Legal Regime of Territorial Waters and the High Seas]. Moscow. 1961.

175. Kolodkin A.L. Istoriya mezhdunarodnogo prava [History of International Law]. / Sovremennoe mezhdunarodnoe morskoe pravo. Rezhim vod i dna Mirovogo okeana [Contemporary International Law of the Sea. The Regime of Waters and Floor of the World Ocean]. Ed. by M.I. Lazared. Moscow: Nauka. 1974.

176. Kolodkin A.L. The Arctic. - In: International Law / chief ed. V.I. Kuznetsov, B.R. Tuzmukhamedov. Mosco. 2007.

177. Korkunov N.M. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo. Lektsii, chitaemye v voenno-yuridicheskoi akademii [International Law. Lectures for the Military and Law Academy]. St.-Petersburg. 1886.

178. Kovalev A.A. Sovremennoe mezhdunarodnoe morskoe pravo i praktika ego primeneniya [Contemporary International Law of the Sea and the Practice of Its Implementation]. Moscow. 2003.

179. Kozhevnikov F.I. Uchebnoe posobie po mezhdunarodnomu publichnomu pravu [Textbook on Public International Law]. Issue I. Istoriya i ponyatiya mezhdunarodnogo prava [History and Notions of International Law]. M. Yuridicheskoe izd-vo NKYu SSSR. 1945.

180. Lakhtin V.L. Prava na severnye polyarnye prostranstva [Title to the Northern Polar Territories]. Izdanie Litizdata Narodnogo Komissariata po Inostrannym Delam. M. 1928.

181. Lavrov S.V. Prioritety vneshnei politiki Rossii na morskom napravlenii [Russia's Maritime Foreign Policy Priorities] // Vneshneekonomicheskie svyazi

[Foreign Economic Relations Journal], - 2005. - Vol. 16. № 4. URL: http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/780/972/1219/8-13.pdf.

182. Maleev Yu.N., Sokirkin V.A. Arkticheskie prolivy kak vid mezhdunarodnykh prolivov sui generis [Arctic Straits as Sui Generis International Straits] // Moscow Journal of International Law. - 2000. - № 4.

183. Melkov G.M. K voprosu o statuse Pecherskogo i Okhotskogo morei [On the Status of the Pechora and Okhotsk Seas]. Moscow Journal of International Law. № 4. 2014.

184. Mezhdunarodnoe morskoe pravo [International Law of the Sea]. Naval Academy named after Admiral of the USSR Fleet N.G. Kuznetsov. Chief author and ed. V.P. Kirilenko. Saint-Petersburg. 1996.

185. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo [International Law]. Chief ed. Ignatenko G.V., Tiunov O.I. Мoscow. 2006.

186. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo [International Law]. Chief ed. Kolosov Yu.M., Krivchikova E.S. Мoscow. 2005.

187. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo [International Law]. Ed. by А.А. Kovaleva, S.V. Chernichenko. Мoscow. 2006.

188. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo i natsional'nye interesy Rossiiskoi Federatsii [International Law and the National Interests of the Russian Federation]. Otv. red. Kovalev A.A., Zimnenko B.L. Мoscow. 2008.

189. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo: uchebnik [International Law: A Textbook] / Vylegzhanin A.N. (Ed.-in-Chief) - 3rd rev. ed.- M.: Yurait, 2006.

190. Mezhdunarodno-pravovaya kvalifikatsiya morskikh raionov v kachestve istoricheskikh vod (teoriya i praktika gosudarstv) [International Legal Qualification of Maritime Regions as Historic Waters (Theory and State Practice)] /Ed. by A.N. Vylegzhanin; IMI MGIMO (U) MID Rossii. - Moscow: MGIMO Press - University, 2012.

191. Mezhdunarodnye sudy: aktual'nye problemy mezhdunarodnogo prava [International Courts: Current Issues of International Law]. Inter-university

Collected Essays. № 2(6). / chief. ed. Ignatenko G.V., ed. Lazutin L.A. Yekaterinburg: 2010.

192. Mirnoe reshenie territorial'nyh sporov / Klimenko B.M. - M.: Mezhdunar. otnosheniya, 1982.

193. Morskoe pravo [Law of the Sea]. Professor of the Imperial Novorossiysk University, A.F. Fyodorov. Odessa. "Tekhnik" Print. 1913.

194. Moscow Journal of International Law. № 1. 2009.

195. Moscow Journal of International Law. № 2. 2018.

196. Neft', Gaz i Pravo [Oil, Gas, and Law], № 1, 2006.

197. Nikolaev A.N., Bunik I.V. Mezhdunarodno-pravovye obosnovaniya prav Kanady v ee arkticheskom sektore [International Legal Arguments Supporting Canada's Claims in Its Arctic Sector] / MJIL, № 1, 2007.

198. Nikolaev A.N., Dudykina I. P. Legal Issues of Preservation and Rational Management of Marine Living Resources in the Central Arctic. // International Cooperation in Environmental Protection, Preservation, and Rational Management of Biological Resources in the Arctic Ocean. Ed.-in-Chief Ivanov I.S. M. 2013.

199. Nikolaev A.N., Peshchurov I.S. Pravovye vozmozhnosti predotvrashcheniya poteri Rossiei vysokoshirotnogo uchastka arkticheskogo shel'fa [The Legal Opportunities for Preventing Russia's Loss of High-Latitude Arctic Shelf] // Sovremennye proizvoditel'nye sily. Fundamental'nye issledovaniya prostranstvennogo razvitiya [Forces of Production Today. Fundamental Studies in Spatial Development]. № 1 2014.

200. Novoe v mezhdunarodnom morskom prave [The New in the International Law of the Sea]. Ed. by S.L. Zivs, B.D. Klyukin, B.M. Klimenko, L.V. Speranskaya, M.I. Lazarev. Moscow. 1972.

201. Ovlashchenko A.V., Pokrovskii I.F. K voprosu ob "ekologizatsii" sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo morskogo prava [On the "Environmentalisation" of the Current International Law of the Sea] // Transportnoe pravo [Transport Law]. - 2009. - № 2.

202. Peshchurov I.S. Rezhim dna Severnogo Ledovitogo okeana soglasno mezhdunarodnomu obychnomu pravu [Regime of the Arctic Ocean Floor under Customary International Law] // MJIL. 2014. № 3(95).

203. Politiko-pravovoi styk Arktiki i Tikhogo okeana: mezhdistsiplinarnoe issledovanie statusa regiona Beringova proliva [Where Politics and Law Meet in the Arctic and the Pacific: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Bering Strait Region]. M. IMI MGIMO MID Rossii. 2017.

204. Predlozheniya k Dorozhnoi karte razvitiya mezhdunarodno-pravovykh osnov sotrudnichestva Rossii v Arktike [Proposals to the Roadmap of Development of the International Legal Bases for Russia's Cooperation in the Arctic] / Ed. by I.S. Ivanov. М., 2013.

205. Proposals to the Roadmap for Developing the International Legal Bases for Russia's Cooperation in the Arctic. RIAC, № VI. Chief ed. I.S. Ivanov. Мoscow. 2013.

206. RIAC working paper № VI. 2013. Ed. I. Ivanov.

207. RIAC. Proposals to the Roadmap of Development of the International Legal Bases of Russia's Cooperation in the Arctic. Workbook. I.S. Ivanov (Ed.-in-Chief), A.N. Vylegzhanin et al. М. 2013.

208. Rossiiskaya Arktika. Spravochnik dlya gosudarstvennykh sluzhashchikh [The Russian Arctic: Manual for Civil Servants]. - М.: Drofa, 2001.

209. Sbornik regional'nykh soglashenii i zakonodatel'nykh aktov zarubezhnykh stran po voprosam moreplavaniya [Collection of Regional Agreements and Legislative Acts of Foreign States on Issues of Navigation]. Vol. IV,1984.

210. Severnyi tekst russkoi literatury [The Northern Text of Russian Literature]. Issue. 2. Khudozhestvennaya kartina mira. M. SAFU. 2014. Ed by E.Sh. Galimova.

211. Timchenko L. Quo Vadis, Arcticum? The International Law Regime of the Arctic and Trends in its Development. Osnova. Kharkiv. 1996.

212. Titushkin V.Yu. K voprosu o vneshnikh granitsakh kontinental'nogo shel'fa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v Arktike. Mezhdunarodnoe morskoe pravo. Stat'i pamyati A.L. Kolodkina [On the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation in the Arctic. International Law of the Sea. Articles in Memoriam of A.L. Kolodkin]. M.: Statut, 2014.

213. Tunkin G.I. Teoriya mezhdunarodnogo prava [Theory of International Law]. M. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. 1970.

214. Vasil'ev A.V./ Arktika: novyi vektor razvitiya [The Arctic: A New Vector for Development] //Arktika. Ekologiya i ekonomika [The Arctic. Ecology and Economy]. № 1. 2011.

215. Voennyi entsiklopedicheskii slovar' [Military Encyclopaedical Dictionary]. Moscow: Voennoe izdatel'stvo. Chief ed. N.V. Ogarkov et al. 1984.

216. Voitolovskii G.K. Teoriya i praktika morskoi deyatel'nosti [Theory and Practice of Maritime Activities]. № 5. Moscow. 2005.

217. Voitolovskii G.K. Vzglyad na sistemnoe morepol'zovanie [A View on Systemic Use of the Sea]. - Moscow: KRAFT+. 2009.

218. Vylegzhanin A., Dudykina, I., Kienko, E., Salygin, V. Positions of the non-arctic states on the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean. Gosudarstvo i pravo [Journal of State and Law]. 2018. № 10.

219. Vylegzhanin A., Potier T. Shaw's International Law. / Moscow Journal of International law. 2017. № 4.

220. Vylegzhanin A.N. 20 let "vremennogo primeneniya" Soglasheniya mezhdu SSSR i SShA o linii razgranicheniya morskikh prostranstv 1990 goda [20 Years of "Provisional Application" of the 1990 USSR-U.S. Maritime Delimitation Agreement] // Vestnik MGIMO-Universiteta [MGIMO University Review]. № 1 (10). 2010.

221. Vylegzhanin A.N. Bioraznoobrazie morskoi sredy i mezhdunarodnoe parvo [Marine Biodiversity and International Law]. / Gosudarstvo i parvo [State and Law Journal]. № 1. 2001.

222. Vylegzhanin A.N. Mezhdunarodno pravovye osnovy prirodoresursnoi deyatel'nosti gosudarstv v Mirovom okeane [International Legal Bases of Exploitation of Natural Resources by States in the World Ocean]. USSR. 2002.

223. Vylegzhanin A.N. Morskie prirodnye resursy (mezhdunarodno-pravovoi rezhim) [Marine Natural Resources (International Legal Regime)]. М.: SOPR. 2001.

224. Vylegzhanin A.N. Pravovoe polozhenie Arkticheskogo regiona v dokumentakh [Documents on the Legal Status of the Arctic Region]. / Arkticheskii region: problemy mezhdunarodnogo sotrudnichestva [The Arctic Region: Issues of International Cooperation]. Vol. 3. Primenimye pravovye istochniki [Applicable Law]. М. 2013.

225. Vylegzhanin A.N. Soglashenie mezhdu SSSR i SShA o linii razgranicheniya morskikh prostranstv 1990 goda [The 1990 USSR-U.S. Maritime Boundary Agreement] // Vestnik MGIMO Universiteta [MGIMO University Review]. - 2010. - № 1.

226. Vylegzhanin A.N. State of Industry, Russian Prospective (Legal Aspects). Proceedings of the 18th Annual International Seafood Conference. Anchorage: USA, 1995.

227. Vylegzhanin A.N. Utochnenie predelov yurisdiktsii Rossii v Arktike na osnove obshchego mezhdunarodnogo prava [Specifying the Scope of Russia's Jurisdiction in the Arctic Based on General International Law]// Mezhdunarodnye sudy: aktual'nye problemy mezhdunarodnogo prava: Mezhvuzovskii sbornik nauchnykh trudov [International Courts: Current Issues of International Law: Interuniversity Collected Works]. № 2 (6). Ed.-in-Chief G.V. Ignatenko, L.A. Lazutin. Yekaterinburg, 2010.

228. Vylegzhanin A.N. Vklad Mezhdunarodnogo Suda OON v progressivnoe razvitie morskogo prava (1949-1990) [The ICJ's Contribution to the Progressive Development of the Law of the Sea (1949-1990)] // Stat'i pamyati A.L. Kolodkina [Articles in Memoriam of A.L. Kolodkin]. М. 2013.

229. Vylegzhanin A.N., Dudykina I.P. Mezhdunarodno-pravovoe osnovanie Daniei, Kanadoi i Norvegiei ustanovlenie pryamykh iskhodnykh linii v Arktike [International Legal Grounds for Denmark's, Canada's, and Norway's Drawing of Straight Baselines in the Arctic]. / Moscow Journal of International Law. №. 1. 2017.

230. Vylegzhanin A.N., Kalamarkyan R.A. Mezhdunarodnyi obychai kak osnovnoi istochnik mezhdunarodnogo prava [International Custom as the Main Source of International Law]. Gosudarstvo i parvo [Journal of State and Law]. № 6. 2012.

231. Vylegzhanin A.N., Kolodkin A.L., Mikhina I.N. Pravovoi rezhim sudokhodstv v Arktike [The Legal Regime of Navigation in the Arctic] / Problemy Severnogo morskogo puti [Problems of the Northeast Passage]. Ed.-in-chief Academician with the Russian Academy of Sciences A.G. Granberg, V.I. Peresypkin. M. Nauka. 2006.

232. Vylegzhanin A.N., Matishov G.G., Morgunov B.A., Sokolova E.L. Mezhdunarodno-pravovaya kvalifikatsiya morskikh raionov v kachestve istoricheskikh vod [International Legal Qualification of Maritime Areas as Historic Waters]. M. MGIMO University. 2012.

233. Vylegzhanin A.N., Molodtsova E.S., Dudykina I.P. Foreign Research of the Law Applicable to Delineation and Delimitation of the Arctic Shelf. Moscow Journal of International Law. 2015;(3).

234. Vylegzhanin A.N., Zilanov V.K. Mezhdunarodno-pravovye osnovy upravleniya morskimi zhivymi resursami. Teoriya i dokumenty [International Legal Grounds for Managing Marine Living Resources. Theory and Documents]. М. 2000.

235. Vylegzhanin A.N., Zilanov V.K. Shpitsbergen: pravovoi rezhim prilegayushchikh morskikh raionov [Spitzbergen: The Legal Regime of Adjacent Maritime Areas]. M.: Morskaya kollegiya pri Pravitel'stve Rossijskoj Federacii. Sovet po izucheniyu proizvoditel'nyh sil, 2006.

236. Vylegzhanin A.N. K tolkovaniyu mezhdunarodno-pravovykh postanovlenii ob iskhodnykh liniyakh [Interpreting International Legal Rules on Baselines]. / Moscow Journal of International Law. № 2. 2011.

237. Vylegzhanin A.N., Gureyev S.A., Ivanov G.G. Mezhdunarodnoe morskoe pravo [International Law of the Sea]. Moscow. 2003.

238. Vylegzhanina E.E. Osnovnye tendentsii razvitiya ekologicheskogo prava Evropeiskogo Soyuza [Key Trends of Development of EU Environmental Law]. Abstract to a diss. for a Doctor of Laws degree. Moscow. 2005.

239. Vylegzhanina E.E. Ot resheniya problem k ikh preduprezhdeniyu: tendentsii razvitiya evropeiskogo ekologicheskogo prava [From Solving Problems to Preventing Them: Evolutionary Trends of European Environmental Law]. // International Law. 2004. № 4.

240. Vysotskii A. F. Morskoi regionalizm (mezhdunarodno-pravovye problemy regional'nogo sotrudnichestva gosudarstv) [Maritime Regionalism (International Legal Issues of Regional Interstate Cooperation]. Kyiv. 1986.

241. Zhudro I.S. K voprosu o roli mezhdunarodnykh obychaev v formirovanii pravovogo rezhima Arktiki [On the Role of International Custom in the Formation of the Legal Regime of the Arctic] // Kazan Journal of International Law and International Relations. № 7/2015.

242. Zhudro I.S. Mezhdunarodno-pravovoi rezhim Severnogo Ledovitogo okeana v usloviyakh globalizatsii. Veroyatnye riski i ugrozy natsional'noi bezopasnosti Rossiiskoi Federatsii v Arktike [The International Legal Regime of the Arctic Ocean in the Context of Globalisation: Likely Threats to the Security of the Russian Federation in the Arctic] // Armiya i obshchestvo [The Army and Society]. № 1 (44). 2015.

243. Zhudro I.S. O modernizatsii mezhdunarodno-pravovoi kontseptsii obosnovaniya vneshnikh granits kontinental'nogo shel'fa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v Arktike [On the Modernization of the International Legal Concept of Substantiating the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation

in the Arctic] // Mezhdunarodnoe publichnoe i chastnoe pravo [Public and Private International Law Journal]. 2015 № 6 (87). IG "Jurist".

244. Zhudro I.S. O neobkhodimosti modernizatsii mezhdunarodno-pravovoi kontseptsii obosnovaniya granits kontinental'nogo shel'fa Rossiiskoi Federatsii v Severnom Ledovitom okeane [On the Need to Modernize the International Legal Concept of Substantiating the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation in the Arctic Ocean] // Pravo i gosudarstvo: teoriya i praktika. № 8 (128) 2015.

245. Zhudro I.S. Obychno-pravovye normy kak komponent unikal'nogo istoricheski slozhivshegosya statusa Arktiki [Customary International Law as a Component of the Unique Historically Crystallized Status of the Arctic] // Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal'nogo universiteta. Seriya "Gumanitarnye i sotsial'nye nauki" [Northern (Arctic) Federal University Journal. "Humanities and Social Studies" Series]. 2014. № 6

246. Zhudro I.S. Pravovoi rezhim Arktiki v usloviyakh globalizatsii [Legal Regime of the Arctic in the Context of Globalisation] // Morskoi sbornik [Maritime Collection]. № 4 (2017) 2015.

247. Zhudro I.S. Regional'nyi i global'nyi urovni mezhdunarodnogo pravovogo rezhima Severnogo Ledovitogo okeana [Regional and Global Levels of the International Legal Regime of the Arctic Ocean] // International Conference of Representatives of States Members of the Arctic Council, States Observers of the Arctic Council and Foreign Scholars on the Current Problems of Sustainable Development and Safety in the Arctic. Naryan-Mar, 5-7 August 2014.

248. Zhudro I.S. Rol' mezhdunarodnykh obychaev v upravlenii Arktikoi [The Role of International Custom in Regulating the Arctic] // Pravo i upravlenie. XXI vek. Nauchno-pravovoe izdanie. Mezhdunarodnyi institut upravleniya [Law and Management. 21st Century. Academic and Legal Journal. International Institute of Management]. MGIMO-University. № 1 (34) 2015.

249. Zhudro I.S. Sektoral'nyi metod kak sposob spravedlivogo razgranicheniya dna Severnogo Ledovitogo okeana [The Sectoral Method as a

Means of Just Delimitation of the Arctic Ocean Floor] // Pravo i politika. Nauchnyi zhurnal [Law and Politics. Academic Journal]. № 6/2015. Nota Bene.

250. Zhudro I.S. Sravnitel'nyi analiz aktual'nykh podkhodov k resheniyu problemy mezhdunarodno-pravovogo zakrepleniya granits kontinental'nogo shel'fa Rossii v Arktike [Comparative Analysis of the Current Approaches to Resolving the Issues of International Legal Determination of the Boundaries of Russia's Continental Shelf in the Arctic]// Eurasian Law Journal. № 1 (80) 2015.

251. Zhudro I.S. Znachenie mezhdunarodnykh obychaev v formirovanii pravovogo rezhima v Arktike [The Role of International Custom in the Formation of the Legal Regime in the Arctic] // Journal of the Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. № 2. 2015.

252. Zhudro A.K., Javad Yu.Kh. Law of the Sea. Moscow: Transport. 1974.

4. National legal sources

253. British North America Acts 1867-1907. Printed by C.H. Parmellee, Printer of the King's Most Excellent Majesty. 1913.

254. Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation № 717 dated 16 June 1997 "On the Procedure for Approving Lists of Geographical Coordinates of the Points Defining the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation". Russian Federation Code. 23 June 1997. № 25. Art. 2939.

255. RSFSR Code, 1921, № 49, Sect. 259.

256. Russian Federation Code dated 3 March 1997, № 9, Art. 1025.

257. Russian Federation Code. 1997. № 25. Sect. 2939.

258. USSR Code. 1926. № 32. Sect. 203. Mezhdunarodnoe pravo v izbrannykh dokumentakh [Selected Documents on International Law] (Part I) / Ed. by V.N. Durdenevskii. M.

5. Internet resources

259. 2015 Audubon Alaska comments on U.S. Coast Guard Bering Sea Port Access Route Study. URL: http://docs. audubon.org/ sites/default/files/documents/bering_strait_pars_ngo_ltr_a nd_appendices_3june2015_0.pdf.

260. A chart describing the scope of the NEAFC's operation can be found here: http://qsr2010.ospar.org/ en/media/ content_img/ch08/Fig_8_1_EN.gif.

261. A/CONF.48/Rev.1, Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, 5-16 June 1972, United Nations, http://www.un-documents.net/aconf48-14r1.pdf

262. ACIA (2004) Impacts of a warming Arctic. ACIA overview report. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council. Oslo. http://www.amap.no/acia/

263. AHDR Arctic Human Development Report. Sustainable Development Working Group of the Arctic Council. Akureyri. (2004) http://www.svs.is/AHDR/.

264. AMAP (2002a) Heavy metals in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http://amap.no/documents/

265. AMAP (2002b) Human health in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http://amap.no/documents/

266. AMAP (2008) Arctic oil and gas 2007. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http://amap.no/oga

267. AMAP (2010a) Radioactivity in the Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http: //library. arcti cportal .org/1215/

268. AMAP (2011a) Snow, Water, Ice, Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA). Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program of the Arctic Council, Oslo. http://www.amap.no/swipa/

269. Amver Reports / Official website of AMVER. URL: http://www.amver.com/amverreports.asp (last accessed on: 25 February 2016).

270. AOG Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines. Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group of the Arctic Council, Akureyri, (2009). http://arctic-council. org/filearchives/

271. Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. P. 106 // NOAA [website]. URL: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/documents/AMSA_2009_Report_2nd_print.pdf.

272. Arctic Ocean Conference, "The Ilulissat Declaration," Ilulissat, Greenland, May 27-29, 2008, at http://arctic-council.org/ filearchive/Ilulissat-declaration.pdf

273. ARCTIC OCEAN Major Fishing Areas. ARCTIC SEA. Major Fishing Area 18 (http://www.fArctic Ocean .org/fishery/area/Area18/en).

274. Ariel Cohen, op. cit.; Steven Groves, "LOST in the Arctic: The U.S. Need Not Ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty to Get a Seat at the Table," Heritage Foundation WebMemo № 1957, June 16, 2008, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/InternationalLaw/wm1957.cfm

275. Ariel Cohen, Ph.D. From Russian Competition to Natural Resources Access: Recasting U.S. Arctic Policy, June 15, 2010 http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/from-russian-competition-to-natural-resources-access-recasting-us-arctic-policy#_ftn57

276. Balton D., Hoydal K. Policy options for Arctic environmental governance: prepared by the fisheries working group of Arctic TRANSFORM Ecologic Institute. Berlin, (2009). http://arctictransform.org/

277. Bellinge I.B. Treaty of Ice. The New York Times: 23 June 2008. / www. nytimes.com/2008/06/23/opinion/23bellinger.html?_r=0

278. Bering Strait Region Case Study // Institute of the North [website]. URL: http://www.institutenorth.org/assets/images/uploads/files/5.5-Bering-Strait-Region-Case-Study.pdf.

279. Bilateral Treaties in Force // U.S. State Department. URL: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/83043.pdf.

280. Bird K.J., Charpentier R.R., Gautier D.L., Houseknecht D.W., Klett T.R., Pitman J.K., Moore T.E., Schenk C.J. Tennyson M.E., Wandrey C.J. Circum-Arctic resource appraisal; estimates of undiscovered oil and gas north of the Arctic Circle: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2008-3049. United States Geological Survey, (2008) Reston. http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3049/

281. CAFF MAP № 41. < library. ARCTIC portal. Org/1373/>

282. Chivers C.J. Russia plants underwater flag at North Pole. The New York Times. 2 Aug 2007. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/02/world/europe/02end-arctic.html

283. Circumpolar Protected Areas Monitoring. Arctic Protected Areas Monitoring Scheme Background Paper. CAFF Monitoring Series Report. - № 5. -March 2011 (http://library.arcticportal.org/1519/1/ArcticProtectedAreas_Background_website2 .pdf).

284. Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its seventh meeting. UNEP/CBD/COP/7/21. - §29-31. -P. 164 (https://www.cbd.int/doc/decisions/C0P-07-dec-en.pdf).

285. Denmark's Application for the North Pole and the Militarization of the Arctic (Federal Media Monitoring: December 15-20, 2014). URL: http://www.arctic-info.com/FederalMonitoringMedia/22-12-2014/denmark-s-application-for-the-north-pole-and-the-militarization-of-the-arctic--federal-media-monitoring--december-15-20--2014.

286. European Commission Facing the challenge of the safety of offshore oil and gas activities. COM (2010) 560 final. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, Brussels, 12 Oct. 2010. http://eur-lex .europa.eu/LexUriS erv/

287. European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. The European Union and the Arctic Region. (2008) (http: / / eur-lex .europa.eu/LexUriSserv/

288. European Parliament resolution of 9 October 2008 on Arctic governance (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ sides/ getDoc. do?pubRef=-

//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2008-0474+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN).

288. European Union Climate change and international security. Paper from the high representative and the European Commission to the European Council, 3 May 2008.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/reports/99387 pdf.

290. European Union Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. The European Union and the Arctic Region. (2008) http://eur-lex .europa.eu/

291. Fjellheim R.S., Henriksen J.B. (2006). Oil and gas exploitation on Arctic indigenous peoples' territories. Human rights, international law and corporate social responsibility. // Galdu Cala - J. Indigenous Peoples Rights 4:137. http://www.galdu.org/govat/doc/oilengelsk2.pdf. Accessed 20 August 2011.

292. From 2 November 2015, Russia has been represented by Ms. I.B. Fominykh. From 9 September 2014, the US has been represented by Mr. R.F. Smith III. Official website of the International Whaling Commission. URL: https://iwc.int/members.

293. Glubokov A.I., Glubokovskii M.K. Mezhdunarodno pravovoe regulirovanie rybolovstva v arkticheskikh moryakh [International Legal Regulation of Fishing in the Arctic Seas] // Arktika: zona mira i sotrudnichestva [The Arctic: a Zone for Peace and Cooperation]. Ed.-in-Chief A.V. Zagorsky. - M.: IMEMO RAN, 2010. - P. 103-120 (http://www.imemo.ru/ru/publ/2011/11011.pdf).

294. Grumbine R.E. What Is Ecosystem Management? http://www.life.illinois. edu/ib/451/Grumbine%20(1994). pdf

295. Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters, 2002 // Official website of the NOAA. URL: http://www.gc.noaa.gov/documents/gcil_1056-MEPC-Circ399.pdf.

296. Guidelines for ships operating in polar waters, 2009 // Official website of the IMO. URL: http://www.imo.org/en/Publications/Documents/Attachments/Pages%20from%20E 190E.pdf.

297. Harper S. Arctic sovereignty an 'important issue'. CTV news, 2 Aug 2007. http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20070802/article_claim_070802/.

298. Henry Huntington, Raychelle Daniel, Andrew Hartsig, Kevin Harun, Marilyn Heiman, Rosa Meehan, George Noongwook, Leslie Pearson, Melissa Prior-Parks, Martin Robards, George Stetsoni. Vessels, risks, and rules: Planning for safe shipping in the Bering Strait. Marine Policy. P. 120. URL: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0308597X14002012/1-s2.0-S0308597X14002012-main.pdf?_tid=baa3c5a0-9c3a-11e5-a42a-

00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1449421355_71210a1f112d3cefded4fe2563c5ffae.

299. http ://arctic-council. org/index.php/en/

300.

http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/reports/256/hdr_1995_en_complete_nostats.p df

301. http://is.dal.ca/~wwwlaw/kindred.intllaw.

302.

http://library. arcticportal. org/1393/1/ CAFF_Map_No_58_Protected_Areas_in_the _Arctic_classed_after_their_IUCN_category_2010.pdf.

303. http://www.mgimo.ru/news/guests/index.phtml.

304. http://www.ospar.org/.

305. http://www.who.int/globalchange/mediacentre/events/2011/social-dimensions-of-climate-change.pdf

306. https://www.britannica.com

307. Ilulissat Declaration of the five states bordering the Arctic Ocean [The Arctic Region: Issues of International Cooperation]. In 3 vols. Vol. 3. Primenimye pravovye istochniki [Applicable Law]. М. 2013. P. 206-208. URL: http://russiancouncil.ru/common/upload/Arctic%20Anthology%20Vol%203.pdf.

308. IMO Guideline for Vessel Traffic Services, Resolution A.857 (20) / URL: http://www.maritime-vts.co.uk/A857.pdf

309. IMO Guidelines for ships operating in polar waters. Resolution A. 1024 (26). International Maritime Organization. London, 2 Dec. 2009. http://www.arcticportal.org/images/stories/Arctic_Shipping_Portlet/A.102426_Gui delines_for_ships_operating_in_polar_waters.pdf. For more details on the Polar Code see the Moscow Journal of International Law. № 4. 2015.

310. IMO International Maritime Organization. Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters. MSC/Circ. 1056, MEPC/Circ.399. International Maritime Organization, London, 23 Dec. 2002. http://www.5.imo.org/SharePoint/blastDatARcticOceannly.asp

311. IMO Resolution A. 982(24) dated 1 December 2005, Revised Guidelines for the Identification and Designation of Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas. URL: http://www.imo. org/ en/OurWork/Environment/PS SAs/Documents/A24-Res.982.pdf

312. IMO website at http://www.imo.org/Pages/home.aspx

313. International Maritime Organization / Official website of the UN. URL: http://www.un.org/ru/ecosoc/imo/

314. Inuit Circumpolar Council: A Circumpolar Inuit Declaration on Resource Development Principles in Inuit Nunaat (2011) http://inuitcircumpolar.com/files/uploads/icc-files/Declaration_on-Resources_Development_A3_FINAL.pdf

315. IPCC (2007) Fourth assessment report. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. http://www.ipcc.ch/. Accessed on 20 Aug. 2011.

316. Joint Statement of the President of the United States of America and the President of the Russian Federation on Cooperation in the Bering Strait Region dated 26 May 2011 // Official website of the President of the Russian Federation. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/ref_notes/938.

317. Kevin C. Hiimer-Pegram, Martin D. Robards. Relevance of a Particular Sensitive Sea Area to the Bering Strait Region: a policy analysis using resilience-based governance principles. Ecology and Society. V. 20. № 1. Art. 26. URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss1/art26/.

318. Large Marine Ecosystems of the World (http://www.lme.noaa.gov/).

319. Law of the Sea. Report of the Secretary-General. A/50/713. November 1, 1995 // Official website of the UN. URL: http://www.un. org/depts/los/general_assembly/general_assembly_reports .htm

320. map describing the MARPOL special areas, 73/78 (http://seafarer-spb.ru/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/marpol.jpg).

321. Melting ice threatens sovereignty over Arctic waters: expert // CBC News, 14 Jun 2006. - Electronic source - www.cbc.ca.

322. Memorandum of Understanding for Cooperation in the Areas of Meteorology, Hydrology and Oceanography between the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration of the Department of Commerce of the United States of America and the Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (the Russian Federation) // Official website of the NOAA. URL: ftp://ftp.etl.noaa.gov/users/tuttal/RussianCustoms/Signed_NOAA-RoshydrometMOU_EN.pdf.

323. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Kingdom of Denmark. URL: http://um.dk/en/news/newsdisplaypage/?newsID=71574E42-6115-4D16-9C8A-4C056F8603F3.

324. Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation. URL: http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/newsline/C4533848E85A09A0C3257DB00053569C.

325. Official website of the AEWC. URL: http://aewc-alaska.com/Our_Mission.html.

326. Official website of the AEWC. URL: http://www.aewc-alaska.com/About_Us.html.

327. Official website of the IMO. URL: http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/polar/Pages/default.aspx

328. Official website of the MFA of Russia. URL: http://www.mid.ru/web/guest/maps/us/-/asset_publisher/unVXBbj4Z6e8/content/id/3 55318.

329. Official website of the WWF. URL: http://ntt.wwf.ru/about/what_we_do/seas/shipping/doc3361/page 1.

330. PAME (2009) Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA). Protecting the Arctic Marine Environment Working Group of the Arctic Council. Akureyri. http://www.pame.is/amsa/amsa-2009-report

331. Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSA) / Official website of the IMO. URL: http://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/PSSA/Pages/default.aspx

332. Paul Arthur Berkman, Oran R. Young. Governance and Environmental Change in the Arctic Ocean // Science. 17 April 2009. Vol. 324. № 5925. P. 339340 (http://www.bren.ucsb.edu/news/documents/Berkman_Young_Science.pdf).

333. Peresypkin, L. Tsoi, V. Shurlyak / Morskoi flot [Navy]. № 4, at http://www.morvesti.ru/tems/detail.php?ID=29222.

334. Recommendations on the Port Access Route Study: In the Chukchi Sea, Bering Strait and Bering Sea. P. 9-10. http://docs.audubon.org/sites/default/files/documents/bering_strait_pars_ngo_ltr_a nd_appendices_3june2015_0.pdf.

335. Report of the workshop to identify areas of ecological and biological significance or vulnerability in the Arctic marine environment. La Jolla, California. 2-4 November 2010. P. 9. URL: https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/documents/Rep-2011-001.pdf

336. Report submitted to Senior Arctic Officials by the Expert Group on Ecosystem-Based Management. May 2013. www.arctic-council.org

337. Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation № 717 dated 16 June 1997 "On the Procedure for Approving Lists of Geographical Coordinates of the Points Defining the Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf of the Russian Federation". URL: URL: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_120266/.

338. Ronald O'Rourke, Coordinator Specialist in Naval Affairs, Changes in the Arctic: Background and Issues for Congress. P. 15. January 19, 2016. URL: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41153.pdf

339. Rosser M. and Fuchs C. Word Heritage and the Arctic.2008. < whc. UNESCO.org/uploads/activities/documents/activity-548-1.pdf>

340. Rufi R.G. Sudokhodstvo v Arktike - put' k rossiisko-amerikanskomu sotrudnichestvu [Arctic Navigation as a Path to Russian-American Cooperation]. URL: http://russiancouncil.ru/inner/?id_4=4805#top-content.

341. Scientific Report "Problems of Environmental Safety in Expanding Navigation in the Bering Strait"// WWF: [website]. URL: http://www.wwf.ru/about/what_we_do/seas/shipping/doc3361/page 1.

342. See Charlie Gibbs Marine Protected Area - Preserving Diversity in the High Seas. (http://charlie-gibbs.org/charlie/sites/all/themes/motion/images/Map-15-2011.png).

343. SEI (2011) Stockholm Environment Institute. Stockholm. http://sei-international.org/news-and-media/1999

344. Shipping in polar waters / Official website of the IMO. URL: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/safety/navigation/pages/shipsrouteing.aspx

345. Sudokhodstvo v Arktike - put' k rossiisko-amerikanskomu sotrudnichestvu [Arctic Navigation as a Path to Russian-American Cooperation]. 20 November 2014 / Official website of the RIAC. URL: http://russiancouncil.ru/inner/?id_4=4805#top

346. The Alta Outcome Document (2013): http://wcip2014.org/1530

347. The Bering Strait Region Heritage. Preliminary Review. P. 36. URL: http://www.nps.gov/akso/beringia/about/pdfs/Recon_study_optimized.pdf.

348. The Continental Shelf Project. URL: http://a76. dk/greenland_uk/north_uk/index.html

349. The Ilulissat Declaration. Arctic Ocean Conference Ilulissat, Greenland, 27-29 May 2008. (http://www.norvegia.ru/nr/rdonlyres/945fb4d9-f4c7-4bcd-a5f9-57c91dce4a7b/94847/080525_arctic_ocean_conference_outcome.pdf).

350. The National Archives Catalogue. URL: https://research.archives.gov/id/299810/.

351. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf

352. U.S. Department of State, "Defining the Limits of the U.S. Continental Shelf," at http://www.state.gov/g/oes/continentalshelf (October 15, 2008).

353. UNECE (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) 2011 Second Assessment of Transboundary Rivers, Lakes and Groundwaters Last accessed at www.unece.org/fileadmin/ DAM/env/water/publications/assessment/English/ECE Second Assessment En.pdf on 26 November 2012.

354. United States (2009a) Arctic Region Policy. National Security Presidential Directive 66 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 25, Washington, DC, Jan 2009. http://georgewbush-whitchouse.archives.gov/

355. United States Fisheries of the United States Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska; Fisheries of the Arctic Management Area: Bering Sea Subarea. Fed Regist. (2009b) 74(211): 56734-56746. http://www.fakr.noaa.gov/frules/74fr56734pdf

356. United States Navy. A cooperative strategy for 21st century seapower. (2007) http://www.nay.mil/maritime/MaritimeStrategy.pdf

357. United States United States Department of the Interior. Press release: Salazar announces revised OCS leasing program. Washington, DC, (2010) http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Salazar-Announces-Revised-OCS-Leasing-Program.cfm

358. United States. Arctic Research Commission the Arctic Ocean and climate change: a scenario for the U.S. Navy. U.S. Arctic Research Commission Special Publication № 02-1, Arlington, (2002). http://www.arctic.gov/publications/arctic_and_climate_change.pdf.

359. URL: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/nome_workshop_report_final.pdf.

360. URL: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N14/719/25/PDF/N1471925.pdf7OpenElement.

361. URL: http://fish.gov.ru/press-tsentr/obzor-smi/7180-mid-otsenil-znachimost-soglasheniya-rf-i-ssha-o-borbe-s-brakonerstvom.

362. URL: http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/russian/article/2011/05/20110526155335x0.5310 894.html#axzz24MDX6CU7.

363. URL: http://morspas.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05.pdf.

364. URL: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/12/15/a-new-cold-war-denmark-gets-aggressive-stakes-huge-claim-in-race-for-the-arctic/#_federated=1

365. URL: http://rt.com/news/214615-denmark-arctic-shelf-claim/.

366. URL: http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/detect/documents/AMSA_2009_Report_2nd_print.pdf.

367. URL: http://www.arctic-council.org/index.php/ru/about-us/arctic-council-2/observers.

368. URL: http://www.gc.noaa.gov/documents/gcil_sad_imo_927.pdf

369. URL: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Navigation/Documents/LRIT/MSC.202(8 1).pdf

370. URL: http://www.kremlin.ru/supplement/938

371. URL: http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_documents.asp?session=28&docid=18090.

372. URL: http://www.mid.ru/maps/us/-/asset_publisher/unVXBbj4Z6e8/content/id/144298

373. URL: http://www.mid.ru/web/guest/maps/us/-/asset_publisher/unVXBbj4Z6e8/content/id/144298.

374. URL: http://www.mnr.gov.ru/news/detail.php?ID=134625&sphrase_id=956636.

375. URL: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/218912.pdf.

376. URL: http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/rus01_rev15/2015_08_03 _Exec_Summary_Russian.pdf

377. URL: https://irsup.hse.ru/data/2015/11/09.pdf.

378. V. Peresypkin, L. Tsoi, V. Shurpyak: Mezhdunarodnyi Polyarnyi kodeks: rossiiskie predlozheniya [The International Polar Code: Russian Proposals] [Electronic resource] / Morskoi flot [Navy]. № 4 (2012). URL: http://www.morvesti.ru/tems/detail.php?ID=29222

379. Wales and the island of Little Diomede have the same population of around 170 inhabitants. Official website of the AEWC. URL: http://aewc-alaska.com/Our_Whaling_Villages.html.

380. Watson R., Moss R., Niederberger A.A. Providing advice to policymakers: international scientific and technical assessment of global environmental issues and challenges for the scientific community. Oceanography. 1996. 9(2) http://www.tos.org/oceanography/issues/isue_archive/issue_pdfs/9_2/9.2_watson_ et_al.pdf

381. Website of the "Beringia, A Shared Heritage" programme. URL: http://www.nps. gov/ akso/beringia/ about/ru-programhi story. cfm.

382. Workshop II Report. Workshop on Expanded Shipping and Other Marine Activities and the Ecology of the Bering Strait Region. Washington, D.C., USA. 31 October - 2 November 2012. P. 10-11. URL: https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_beringworkshopii2013_russian.pdf.

383. Workshop on integrated policy options for the Bering Strait Region. National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS). University of California Santa Barbara. 20-24 October 2014 // Arctic Options [website]. URL: http://arcticoptions.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Final_Bering-Strait-Workshop-Report_13JUN15 .pdf

384. Workshop Report, 26-28 June 2012. Nome, Alaska, USA. URL: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_beringworkshopi2012_russian_2.pdf.

385. Workshop to identify several viable options for the protection of Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) from the possible negative effects of shipping and other maritime activities in the Bering Strait Region. Workshop Report, 26-28 June 2012. Nome, Alaska, USA. URL: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/iucn_beringworkshopi2012_russian_2.pdf

386. www.caff.is1996

387.

www.imo.org/About/Convention/StatusofConventions/Pages/Default.aspx.