The National Security Perspective
Revisited
States’ Energy Security and the Environmental Security
Gabriel Estenberg
Global Political Studies IR103S
International Relations 61-90 Bachelor's Degree
15 Credits
Spring Term 2018
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to counterargue Simon Dalby’s claim that the national security perspective should be replaced by a global security perspective. Dalby argues that the national security is inappropriate to capture the current issues regarding the environmental security. To counterargue Dalby’s claim, I represent the national security perspective by using the perspective of states’ energy security, and compare current trends and issues regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. This is done to argue that states can either chose to enhance their own energy security or the environmental security. Prisoners' Dilemma is then used as a theoretical framework on an explanatory example to provide insights about a dilemma, called the Energy-Environment Dilemma in this thesis, that curbs states’ ability to commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environmental security. The explanatory example used is the strategic importance of the Northwest passage for the U.S. and Canada. The results of this thesis suggests that the national security perspective, in combination with Prisoners’ Dilemma, is useful to provide insights about the Energy-Environmental Dilemma. Replacing it with a global security perspective would be to ignore a perspective the can provide insights about a challenge for states to commit to the cause of protecting the environmental security.
Table of content
1. Introduction
1
2. Previous research
3
2.1 Critique against the National Security Perspective 3
2.2 States’ energy security 5
2.3 Environmental security 8
2.4 Summary of previous research 11
3. Theory
14
3.1 The dilemma in Prisoners’ Dilemma 14 3.2 The advantages and limits of Prisoners’ Dilemma in this thesis 19
4. Method
21
4.1 Explanatory example and material 21 4.2 The strategic importance of the Northwest passage for the U.S. and Canada 23
5. Analysis
25
5.1 The global trends and issues’ impact on the Northwest passage 26 5.2 Benefits for states by reducing emission 29 5.3 Prisoners’ Dilemma applied on the explanatory example 30 5.4 The Energy-Environmental Dilemma’s consequences on environmental security 32
6. Discussion
33
1. Introduction
International Relation (IR) and security studies have come to include new perspectives which focus on different referent objects when studying security. These perspectives focus on other referent objects than the traditional national security perspective (NSP), which focuses on states’ security. These new perspectives can be seen as theoretical compensations to the NSP, that can be used to shed light upon and explain threats to referent objects other than the state. However, some scholars argue that the NSP should be replaced by these new perspectives. Simon Dalby argues that the NSP should be replaced by a global security perspective, since this perspective is a cause for other referent objects’ security being undermined and because of its inability to explain current security issues (Dalby 2013: 322). The current security issues that Dalby is concerned with are the ones caused by climate change. The purpose of this thesis is to counterargue these claims by illustrating why the NSP is useful to provide understanding about climate change and other issues regarding the environmental security. This means that this thesis both has a theoretical problem and an empirical problem that it sets out to provide insights about. The theoretical problem is to provide insights about how the NSP can be used to explain issues regarding the environmental security. The empirical problem is to provide insights about issues regarding the environmental security, especially climate change. By providing insights about the theoretical problem of this thesis, an understanding about the empirical problem will also be obtained.
The thesis begins with an overview of previous research directing criticism against the NSP. This discussion is useful in my thesis to frame my counterargument against Dalby’s claim that the NSP should be replaced by a global security perspective. However, it is also useful to put this thesis’ theoretical problem in the context of previous security thinking in IR and security studies. This is done by presenting the critique that Richard Ullman directed against the NSP back in the 1980s. This discussion is followed by an overview of current issues and trends regarding states’ energy security. In this thesis, states’ energy security will be used to represent the NSP. Therefore, both the concept of NSP and states’ energy security will be used to define a perspective where the state is the referent object. However, state’s energy security is seen from the perspective of states’ specific interest of sustaining their energy security. The concept of states’ energy security, and the current trends and issues that can be linked to this concept, will be important in my thesis since they will represent the NSP and current challenges to states’ national security. The overview of state’s energy
security will in turn be followed by an overview of current trends and issues regarding the environmental security, which is the thesis’ empirical problem.
After the presentation of previous research, I summarise the previous research to further motivate the research conducted in this thesis. In this part, I make the observation of an important relation where it seems as if states’ energy security and the environmental security have a relation to each other reminding of a zero-sum game. I call this dimension the Energy-Environmental Nexus (EEN). This means that states can either choose to enhance their energy security, or enhance the environmental security. By observing this, it is argued that Prisoners' Dilemma (PD) can be used to provide insights about which kind of security that is most rational for a state to enhance; either its energy security or the environmental security. PD will be useful because it neatly encapsulate a dilemma that curbs states’ ability to commit themselves to a given cause when they, at the same time, want to increase their own interest and security. The dilemma that PD will illustrate in this thesis is the dilemma that curbs states ability to commit to the cause of protecting the environmental security, by cutting emission and keeping fossil resources unextractable. The dilemma will in this thesis be defined as the Energy-Environmental Dilemma (EED). This discussion is then linked to the theoretical problem. It is argued that by using a NSP, together with PD to illustrate the EED, this thesis will be able to provide understanding about how the NSP can be used as a theoretical tool to provide insights about the hardship for states to commit to the environmental security. This will also provide insights about the empirical problem. Before continuing to discuss PD, Ullman and his critique against the NSP is reviewed. This is done to provide a broader understanding of the concept of NSP and the history it has in IR and security studies.
Because of the important role that PD has in this thesis (to illustrate the EED), I need to present the theory to the reader. This is done in the part following the summary of previous research. I begin this part by discussing PD’s history and how it has been used in earlier research. This is followed by a critical discussion about how PD is used and applied in this thesis. Before I go on with my analysis, I discuss the method used in this thesis. In this part, I present and motivate the choice of using an explanatory example in my thesis. I use the strategic importance of the
Northwest passage (NWP) for the U.S. and Canada as an explanatory example. This example will be useful since it helps me make necessary limitations in my thesis. In this part I also discuss some problems with the limitations and the material used. I then present the explanatory example by giving a brief historical overview of the marine vessel SS Manhattan’s journeys in the NWP back in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This is useful because three important observations can be made
from SS Manhattan’s journeys about the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada, and the consequences of it. This is followed by my analysis, which in turn is followed by a
discussion of this thesis’ results. All this is done to provide an answer to the following research question: ”What insights can Prisoners’ dilemma provide about the significance of states’ energy security and the environmental security regarding the strategic importance of the Northwest passage for the U.S. and Canada?”. By answering this question, insights about the NSP’s usefulness to provide understanding about current issues regarding environmental security will be provided.
2. Previous research
In this part, I present previous research. I begin with presenting some critique against the NSP. This is followed by a scientific overview regarding states’ energy security and the environmental
security. This is then summarised. In the summary, I use the previous research to further motivate my research.
2.1 Critique against the National Security Perspective
Studies in International Relations (IR) and security studies (viewed as a subfield of IR at first) were formed as a scientific subject in the beginning of the 20th century, with a main focus on states’ national security as referent object and how to sustain the status quo in the international society. However, since the end of the 20th century, the number of interstate conflicts has decreased while the number of civil wars has increased. This trend has affected security studies and led to new perspectives in the field. A common theme, that the new security perspectives share, is that they change referent object. Instead of using the state as referent object they instead use other referent objects such as humans, gender or environment (Peoples & Vaughan-Williams: 121-123 & Williams 2013: 3). Some scholars even argue that the traditional security perspective, focusing on states’ security, is a reason that other referent objects’ security is being challenged.
In the early 1980s,Richard Ullman presented critique against the NSP. However, he did not directly criticise the state as referent object in his ”Redefining Security” (1983). Instead, he
criticised states’ (especially the U.S.) dominant focus on military as a mean to achieve their national security. Ullman poses questions in his text where he asks what would be the best choices for the
U.S. to take in certain situations to sustain their security. One of these questions is related to the Persian Gulf and the U.S. energy security. Ullman asks if the U.S. should spend its resources on a military intervention in the Persian Gulf to take control of the region and make sure that a continued flow of oil is sustained, or spend resources on non-military means that would decrease their
dependence on oil from the Persian Gulf. Non-military means could, according to Ullman, be the conservation of energy resources or alternative energy sources. Ullman argues that the U.S. has often chosen military means in situations as posed by the question, and that these choices have led to more insecurity in the world, rather than more security (Ullman 1983: 131-132). By choosing military means as the solution, Ullman argues that the U.S., as well as other states, have ”increased worldwide arms expenditures, heightened intra-regional confrontations, and greater fragility rather than resilience in Third World government” (Ullman 1983: 132). He believed that the U.S. made these bad choices because of their dominant focus on military means in security perspectives (Ullman 1983: 129-133).
In hindsight, it should be noted that Ullman wrote this text during the end of the Cold War. This is important, since the text was written in a time when IR and security studies were dominated by a traditional NSP and a constant focus on military means, especially concerning nuclear
deterrence. How to maintain stability in the international society, dominated by the U.S. and USSR, was the prevailing agenda of IR and security studies. Ullman, together with a few other scholars, were among the first whose critique against the traditional NSP gained practical or intellectual headway. As mentioned in the introduction, after the end of the Cold War, the traditional NSP has faced increased critique and other referent objects than the state have come to be used in IR and security studies. Ullman's critique of the dominant military focus can be seen as the start of the new security perspectives that have come to gain more influence and deepened their critique against the NSP (Williams 2013: 3-4).
One of the scholars that has deepened the critique against the NSP is Simon Dalby. Dalby does not only see the dominant military focus as a mean to achieve security as problematic; he sees the whole framing of threats in the NSP as inappropriate to deal with the security issues stemming from climate change. According to Dalby, when studying climate change, it becomes apparent that a global perspective is appropriate to grapple the issues connected to climate change, while a national security perspective is inappropriate because climate change does not take national borders into consideration. Dalby argues that describing threats created by climate change as an external threat
will make it harder for international cooperation to take place, which is necessary to deal with global issues such as climate change (Dalby 2013: 322).
2.2 States’ energy security
In this part, I define and discuss previous research to introduce the current issues and trends related to energy security. I begin by discussing why energy security is closely connected with the NSP. Thereafter, I discuss some central issues and current trends related to energy security by reviewing previous research about this concept. Understanding these issues, related to states’ energy security and current trends and issues in the global energy supply, will be useful to represent the NSP. Energy security has become important to security studies and national security in recent years. According to Michael T. Klare, a common definition of energy security is ”the assured delivery of adequate supplies of affordable energy to meet a state’s vital requirements, even in times of international crisis or conflict” (Klare 2013: 536). As becomes apparent in this definition, the state is the referent object when analysing energy security. This is because of the vital role energy has for states. In the case of India and China, states are directly involved in procuring energy through the activities of state-owned companies. In most western states, the task of procuring, producing and delivering energy is given to private companies. However, these states are often involved in procuring energy by different types of intervention that are supposed to make sure that private energy companies can deliver an adequate supply of energy (Klare 2013: 535-536).
Today, societies are dependent on energy to function and the more a society produces, the more dependent the society is on energy. Hence, gross domestic product (GDP) often correlates with energy consumption. High GDP is often accompanied by high energy consumption. Because of this, flows of energy supplies are important for states to uphold their productivity and sustain their economy. But energy security also has a military dimension because of the military’s need of energy to be able to operate. However, other institutions in societies, such as schools, hospitals,etc. are also depending on a reliable supply of energy (Klare 2013: 535-536 and EIA 2017a). Even individuals living in societies with a high well-being (including myself) are dependent on a lot of energy to be able to sustain their lifestyle by driving a car to work, browsing the internet on an electronic device and take warm water showers whenever they want (Klare 2013: 536).Taking all this together, it becomes apparent that energy is a vital need for states to uphold productivity, the military and the societies within them. Therefore, energy security is closely connected with the NSP
because of the state-centric focus. In this thesis, states’ energy security will represent the NSP, with a specified state security interest, which is to sustain energy security.
Another dimension that the common definition of states’ energy security implies, isan adequate flow of energy supplies that meets the needs of the state, not being too expensive, even in times of international crisis or conflict. The oil crisis in 1973, caused by a drastic increase in oil prices, is one example of this dimension. The dominant role that oil had for many industrialized states led to a dependency on the countries producing oil. In 1973, these oil producing countries and members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), with weak military resources, could control the oil prices. By doing this, they tried to impose their will on highly industrialised states. By lowering their production of oil, these OPEC members could increase global oil prices. They also launched an embargo on the U.S. and the Netherlands because of their support of Israel during the Yom Kippur War. Pressure was also put on other industrialised states to stop their support of Israel by stating that the oil production would decrease until Israel withdrew from the territories they had occupied in 1967 (Rüdiger 2014: 100). Exactly how much impact this had on the industrialised states, dependent on oil from OPEC members, is hard to say. However, this historical example shows the possibility for united foreign oil suppliers to try to exercise power and affect other states’ foreign policy by cutting off the supply of energy. In other words, it shows a possible consequence that too much dependency on one united foreign energy source can have on states’ autonomy in their foreign policy. Vice versa, it also illustrates the power a state can gain by being an important energy supplier to another state.
Another dimension of states’ energy security can be illustrated by Whensheng Cao and Christoph Bluth’s study on China’s energy policy. Cao & Bluth address some potential security dilemmas, stemming from the Chinese government’s plans to diversify internal energy production and imports. Please note that even though this study dates from 2012, I am here only interested in the given security issue, and not what has happened since then. For China, energy is important to sustain and uphold the economic growth they have experienced in the last decades. China has almost been able to rely entirely on domestic energy sources. However, as the GDP per head (GDPPH) continues to grow, China has become more dependent on more energy supplies because of the increased demand of energy. To answer the increased demand of energy, China will need to start importing, and thereby increase their dependency on international energy markets. This dependency on international energy markets will surely lead to new security dilemmas for China. One example is their future dependency on the U.S. An increase in dependency on foreign oil and
gas will increase China’s dependency on the U.S., since the U.S. controls important international shipping lanes needed to transport oil. However, if China does not import energy sources, their growth in GDPPH will be hard to sustain (Cao & Bluth 2012: 381-382, 386). Once again, how much this will affect China and their autonomy in foreign policy is hard say. Still, China’s dependency on foreign energy supplies will become an important factor to consider in China’s future national security policy.
Together, these cases show us some issues connected to states’ energy security. One issue is the risk associated with a dominant dependency a single united energy source. To increase their energy security, states should try to variate their energy supplies as much as possible with different sources. Then, if one of their energy source would be cut off, they could instead relay on their other sources. However, the oil crisis of 1973 illustrates the possibility of gaining power over other states’ foreign policy by producing and delivering energy sources to states that are strongly dependent on them. Cao and Bluth’s study of China’s energy policy shows us the security dilemmas associated with establishing an energy supply dependent on international markets. If China could have continued to meet their energy demands through the internal production of fossil fuels, they could have avoided these security dilemmas. However, to sustain and uphold their GDPPH they need to establish new flows of energy supplies. Therefore, if states can produce their own energy, they can avoid security dilemmas that could possibly pose threats to their autonomy in foreign policy. When states try to establish an adequate supply of affordable energy that balances their demand, they have to consider these issues.
One important current trend in global energy supply is the growing global demand of energy. Developing countries with a strong economic growth, such as China, are increasing their demand of energy, and according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) outlook, the total world energy consumption will have increased with 28% from 2015 in 2040. And even though renewable energy is the world’s fastest growing energy source, the outlook predicts that fossil fuels will still account for 77% of the world’s total energy use in 2040 (EIA 2017a). The dominant role that fossil fuels have, and will have in the future, makes it an important energy source for states. However, fossil resources are finite and can be depleted. The increased energy demand and the still dominant role fossil fuel will have as an energy source raises concerns about depleting existing sources of fossil resources. Reports about the decrease in productivity in existing oil fields and a decline of new oil fields enhances these concern. This has led states and industries to look at fossil resources located in remote areas, such as the Arctic (Klare 2013: 542-543). According to a
study made by U.S. Geological Survey in 2008 (USGS 2008), it was estimated that the Arctic holds about 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil resources, and approximately 30% of the world’s
undiscovered conventional natural gas resources. However, these resources are often located in remote icy areas, hard to extract and require large investments for extraction (EIA 2012).
Even though the dominant focus on fossil fuels, renewable energy has become an important aspect of states’ energy security. Today, renewable energy is dominated by biomass and hydro energy, but also wind power. Solar power is also growing but produces less energy than bioenergy, hydropower and wind power, and is more expensive than the other alternatives. Bengt Johansson discusses some aspects of states’ energy security regarding renewable energy. Unlike fossil fuels, renewable energy is produced by using infinite resources (biomass can be seen as a finite resource if harvest exceeds growth) and thereby provides sustainability in the production of energy. Therefore, it is a good alternative as a sustainable delivery of energy. However, according to Johansson, it is often assumed that renewable energy is a domestic resource that reduces dependency on imports of energy. Even though this is true in the current situation, an increase in the use of renewable energy and a decreasing use of other energy sources would make states more dependent on importing renewable energy if their local supply cannot meet their energy demand. This means that the risk of being to dependent on another state’s delivery of energy, in a world where renewable energy is the dominant energy source, would still be a dilemma for states trying to establish supplies of energy. In general, renewable energy sources are however not as concentrated to a region or a state as fossil energy sources. Renewable energy is in general available in all states. Johansson sees this as an argument for the reduced risk of a single state being able to pressure or influence other states by threaten to stop the flow of energy supply (Johansson 2013: 598-602).
2.3 Environmental security
In this part, I discuss current issues and trends regarding environmental security. This is the
empirical problem in my thesis. I begin with an overview on the biggest current issue regarding the environmental security, which is the climate change. This is followed by a presentation of earlier research regarding environmental security. However, I also discuss some consequences that the increased interest in the Arctic fossil resources can have on the regional ecosystem. Finally, I talk about renewable energy as a possible alternative to fossil fuels, that could enhance the
change. John Broome, who is a lead author of the UN intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, discusses the causes, implications and consequences of climate change. The rising global average temperate, leading to climate change, are caused by humans’ emission of greenhouse gases. A large part of these gases are being released into the air when fossil resources are converted into usable energy (Broome 2012: 6, 17-18).
The temperature on earth is affected by a balance of the incoming energy radiation produced by the sun and the outgoing radiant energy. In the atmosphere, some of the outgoing radiant energy is absorbed by different gases. This keeps the earth warmer than it would have been if there was no gases in our atmosphere. The greater quantity of gases in the atmosphere, the more radiant energy is being absorbed, causing the global average temperature to increase. The gas that has increased most in the atmosphere during the 20th century is carbon dioxide, and this increase is due to human activity. When we burn fossil fuels, carbon dioxides are being released into the air, causing the temperature on earth to rise. The increase of the global average temperature in recent years has had, and will have a big impact on our planet. Glaciers and ice caps melting, sea levels rising, deserts expanding and more forests burning are just some consequences. One of the regions that has become strongly affected by the global warming is the Arctic. Because of global warming, a large decrease in sea ice thickness and extent has been observed, increasing in recent years (Broome 2012: 17-18, 22-23 & AMAP 2017: 4).
According to Broome it is hard to say exactly what effects climate change will have, since climate change affects the entire surface layer of the world including oceans, atmosphere,
continents, humans and other life. Such a prediction requires the expertise of physicists, chemists, ecologists, biologists and social sciences. However, it is a real threat to infrastructure, human life, ecological systems and economies (Broome 2012: 7-8). To stop the climate change, we have to reduce our emission of greenhouse gases. As mentioned, many of these gases are being released into the atmosphere when we use fossil fuels as energy source. The increase in demand of energy supplies and the still dominant role fossil fuels will have in 2040 (according to EIA), will lead to a continued increase of the temperature on earth.
As mentioned in the introduction of this thesis, Dalby argues that the NSP is inappropriate to use when analysing environmental security, since climate change is a global issue. Because of the big impact climate change has and will have on the planet, states and human life, it has become the dominant issue to discuss in research about environmental security. Rising global average
climate change implies all over the world through the lens of a traditional NSP, focusing on states’ security, does not capture the whole issue posed by global climate change. Because of this, Dalby argues that we should replace the NSP with a global security perspective (Dalby 2013: 313, 322). Dalby and Zahra Moussavi even argue that the failure to reach a binding agreement and a realistic plan to limit the global average temperature in environmental summits is partly due to the NSP. They argue that the environment, as a global security issue, is considered of less importance than the ”high politics” of international rivalries (Dalby & Moussavi 2017: 40).
Dalby and Moussavi also point out a disjunction regarding claims that the U.S. has made concerning energy security and environmental security. The U.S. has made claims to cut emission of greenhouse gases, while at the same time implementing policies to drill and dig fossil resources to create a domestic source to energy, increasing their energy security. When the U.S. extracts and uses these fossil resources as energy sources, instead of leaving them be, they release more emission into the atmosphere. Therefore, the U.S. counteracts their own claims regarding
environmental security when they secure their energy security by extracting fossil resources. These two claims, regarding energy security and environmental security, do not go well along. This example illustrates how different policies regarding states’ energy security can trump global
environmental security (Dalby & Moussavi 2017: 42). However, it is not only by releasing emission that policies to extract fossil resources (to increase energy security) threaten the environmental security.
As discussed, the global energy market is looking for new sources of fossil fuels, often located in remote areas, such as the Arctic. The climate in the Arctic is harsh, making it harder to safely extract fossil fuels. The combination of a climate making it harder to extract and transport fossil resources safely, and an environment that would recover slowly from an oil spill, makes the Arctic’s marine ecosystem vulnerable. Up to date, no recent oil spill has occurred in the Arctic or in the near region. However, in 1989, the oil tanker Exxon Valdez spilled approximately 36.000 tons of crude oil in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Still today, oil from the Exxon Valdez spill is being documented in the environment and in fishes. The hardship of responding to an oil or gas spill in the more remote and icy areas in the Arctic also makes the Arctic more vulnerable to spills (AMAP 2007 & Shelton et.al 2018). Therefore, the current trend in states’ energy security to extract fossil resources in more remote areas, could also trump the environment’s security by threatening ecosystems. This is also an example of how states’ interest in improving their energy security can undermine and trump the environmental security.
Today, renewable energy is often seen as the most important energy alternative for states, that would sustain the environmental security. Johansson discusses some environmental security aspects regarding renewable energy. According to Johansson, an increase of sustainably produced renewable energy as energy source, accompanied by a decrease of the use of fossil fuels, would reduce emission of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, if the production of renewable energy is not sustainable, these positive effects for the climate may be lost. If biomass becomes the dominant global energy source, combined with the increasing need for energy, carbon dioxide will still be released into the atmosphere when biomass is being burned. The need for bioenergy could, in this case, also lead to food production being transferred to energy production. Instead of growing food, material used to create biomass could be grown. This could move the production of food to other areas, leading to more areas being used for agriculture. The increase in agriculture could be a threat to the natural systems’ biodiversity (Johansson 2013: 603).
2.4 Summary of previous research
In this part, I summarise the previous research discussed and make conclusions useful to further motivate the purpose of this thesis and the research conducted. If we compare trends and issues related to states’ energy security and issues related to the environmental security, it becomes apparent that these issues and trends are connected to each other. The dominant role of fossil fuels in providing the world with energy affects the climate, since carbon dioxide is being released into the atmosphere. Also, the fear of depletion of already existing sources of fossil resources makes fossil resources in remote areas, such as the Arctic, more attractive to states and markets. This could, if ice continues to melt, increase extraction and shipping of fossil resources in the Arctic and the risk of an oil spill that would threaten the marine ecosystem.
These examples illustrate a relation where states’ energy security and the environmental security are on opposite ends. Dalby and Moussavi also point out this relation when they discuss the disjunction regarding the U.S. claims to the global environmental security and their energy security. If states want to ensure their energy security by burning more fossil fuels, this will undermine the environmental security by posing threats such as increased climate change and the risk of an oil spill in the vulnerable Arctic climate. However, if states do not ensure their energy security by burning fossil fuels, this could lead to economic backlashes for them, as sustaining and increasing their productivity becomes harder. For example, if China would not have used their internal fossil
resources, their economic growth would have been harder to sustain and uphold. In this thesis, I will call the relation where states’ energy security and the environmental security are in opposite ends, in something reminding of a zero-sum game, for the Energy-Environment Nexus (EEN). However, the existence of the EEN can be questioned by the increased use of renewable energy.
According to Johansson, renewable energy is an alternative to fossil fuels that would, if used sustainably, reduce the impact of climate change but also reduce the risk of a state being too
dependent on another state’s energy supply delivery. Sustainable renewable energy could therefore offset the negative zero-sum game in the EEN because states could establish supplies of energy that would not threaten the environmental security. However, as discussed above, when reports warn that existing oil fields are being depleted, states turn their focus and resources to fossil resources located in remote areas where large investments are needed to extract these resources. This instead of turning their focus towards sustainable renewable options. State behavior like this, and the prediction that fossil fuels will still have a dominant role in providing the world with energy in the future (EIA 2017a), suggests that the offset of the zero-sum game in the EEN will not become a reality.
The existence of the EEN is an important assumption in this thesis. This is because it creates a situation where, because of the zero-sum relation between states’ energy security and the
environmental security, states have two choices. Either a state choses to secure its energy security or the environmental security; it cannot enhance both. In this thesis, I will provide insights about which choice a rational state would make when faced with these two choices. To do this, I will use Prisoners’ Dilemma (PD) to provide insights about the dilemma states face when they try to commit to a cause, and at the same time try to increase their own interests and security. Because of the centrality that energy has for states to function, by sustaining productivity and the economy, states need to commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environment. The existence of the EEN means that by committing to this cause, states need to undermine their energy security by
decreasing emissions and not extract useful fossil resources. This provides a dilemma for states. In the thesis, I call this dilemma the Energy-Environmental Dilemma (EED). I want to remind the reader that the EEN and the EED are not the same thing. The EEN is the definition for the existence of a relation between states’ energy security and environmental security that reminds of a zero-sum game. If states’ energy security is enhanced, the environmental security is undermined. The EED is the dilemma for states, highlighted in this thesis by PD, to commit themselves to the protection of the environmental security, caused by the existence of an EEN. PD is a useful theoretical tool to
neatly and concisely encapsulate the EED and show how it can curb states’ ability to commit to the cause of protecting the environmental security, by cutting emission and keeping fossil resources unextractable.
By using PD to illustrate the EED and show which choice a state faced with the EED will make, I will provide insights about how the NSP can be used as a theoretical tool to understand the current issues regarding environmental security. The NSP is a useful analytical tool because it is a perspective that, in combination with PD, can highlight the EED. This will counterargue Dalby’s claim that the NSP is no longer useful to explain current issues regarding the environmental security. However, it will also provide a deeper critique against both Ullman and Dalby. Both Ullman and Dalby share the belief that it is states’ security perspective that determines their behavior. For example, Ullman believes that if the U.S. would implement another security perspective, not prioritizing military as the best mean available, the U.S. would change their behavior in foreign policy. So, if the U.S. would start prioritizing renewable energy as the most important mean to provide security, they would invest more on renewable energy instead of the military. Dalby believes that if we replace the NSP with a global security perspective, successes in international cooperation could be made because states would then be more committed to cooperate, because the global security would be more important than their own national security. This would make international cooperation easier. Again, Ullman and Dalby believe that the implemented perspective decide states’ behavior. So when the world is challenged by problems related to global warming and more international cooperation is needed to face these problems, a change of security perspective can address this need.
I agree with Ullman and Dalby. A change in the security perspective can affect states’ behavior. However, as will be illustrated in this thesis, there is an EED that states face when committing themselves to protecting the environmental security and at the same time want to increase their own interest and security. In other words, it is not just a question about perspective or what states focus on; it is also a question about an incentive for states to do what is best for their own interest and security. This incentive puts states in the EED, in certain situations under certain circumstances. To prove all of this, I will apply PD on an explanatory example where two states’ interests are analysed. The two states can either chose to enhance their own energy security, or commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environmental security. The explanatory example is used to make necessary limitations in my thesis. It concerns the strategic importance of the Northwest passage (NWP) for the U.S. and Canada. I explain why this case is suitable to use to
limit my thesis in the ”Method” part.By using the explanatory example, I will be able to prove that the EED, put in focus by implementing a NSP and using PD, is useful to explain current threats and issues regarding environmental security.
Before I continue with the presentation of PD, I want to discuss this thesis’ context in contemporary IR and security studies. When Ullman criticised the NSP, it was in the context of the ending of the Cold War. IR and security studies, as academic fields, where dominated by a strong focus on nuclear deterrence. In 1991, the USSR was dissolved and this marked the end of the Cold War. This was followed by the entrance of a wide variety of new security perspectives in IR and security studies. In the context in which Ullman criticised the NSP, the NSP was a state-centric and military-oriented perspective, used to analyse the relationship between the U.S. and USSR during the Cold War. This is important to keep in mind. Today, security and the NSP have become wide concepts that include a lot of different perspectives (Williams 2013: 3-4). One of these perspectives is for example energy security, that has gained increased influence only in recent years (Klare 2013: 535). Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that the definition Ullman meant when he criticized the NSP is not the same as the definition used in this thesis. In this thesis, the definition of the NSP is used to analyse threats against states, but also other referent objects, stemming from issues related to energy security and the environmental security. One could argue that a broader, and more
updated, NSP is used in this thesis, compared to the NSP Ullman criticised back in the early 1980s.
3. Theory
3.1 The dilemma in Prisoners’ Dilemma
To illustrate the EED, I will use PD as a theoretical framework. As already mentioned, PD shortly summarizes and neatly encapsulate a dilemma for states to commit themselves to a cause. This dilemma, that PD points out, is applied on the context of current trends and issues regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. As discussed in the previous section, there seems to be a EEN that creates a situation that requires states to choose between their own energy security, or committing themselves to the protection of the environmental security. PD is used to illustrate a dilemma, called EED, that states face in making the choice between their own energy security and the environmental security. I begin by discussing the history of PD, and then go through previous
research that concerns PD. Before I continue with reviewing the methods, I discuss some advantages and limits regarding how PD is used in this thesis.
PD is a game structure part of the science of interactive decision-making, called Game Theory (GT). The beginning of GT can be traced back to 1944 when John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern published the book Game and Economic Behaviour. At first, game theory was widely used in economics but was eventually also used in other fields, such as IR and security studies. GT is based on a perspective where you see a situation as a game. In such a game, the outcome depends on the choices that the players make. The players can consist of both individuals and groups of individuals that work as a coherent unit. Possible outcomes can vary between different games that use different empirical material. In IR and security studies, when using the NSP, it is common to use a non-cooperative game. The non-cooperative game is a game where it is assumed that the players are unable to commit themselves to any given course of action. According to the traditional school of realism in IR, it is assumed that the international system is anarchic and lacks any kind of rule of law. Therefore, there is no authority that can force states to follow binding agreements that they have committed to. Because of this, it is assumed that states cannot be forced to follow an
agreement. This assumption about the international system that states exists in and its implications has made the non-cooperative game common in studies about interstate conflict (Zagare 2013: 48-50). This is the basis of the dilemma (EED) that PD highlights.
In game theory, a strategy can be defined as a ”complete contingency plan that specifies a player’s choice at every situation that might arise in a game” (Zagare 2013: 50). PD, as a part of GT, has become very common in social studies. In IR, PD has been used in various ways, e.g. to analyze and explain an arms race between two states, where states represent the players (Smith, Sola & Spagnolo 2000 for example use PD to study the Greek-Turkish arms race over the period 1958-97).In this game, states can either chose to commit themselves to cooperate (C), by not arming, or defect (D) from the commitment, by arming. It is assumed that both states want to protect themselves from becoming overwhelmed by the other states’ military power. If both states chose to cooperate, the outcome will be a balance in military power at a small cost, because no increased military spending is needed to uphold the power balance (outcome CC, see figure 3.1 on next page). However, if one state chooses to defect and arm, while the other state chooses not to arm, the arming state gains a military advantage, while the state not arming ends up in a strategic disadvantage (either outcome CD or DC in figure 3.1). If both states choose to arm, a balance in
military power is also achieved, but at a higher cost for both states (Zagare 2013: 50 & Axelrod 1984: 7-10).
As can be seen in figure 3.1, each cell of the matrix contains a number that illustrates the payoffs each state gains if that outcome is obtained. For example, if outcome CD is obtained, State A receives ”1” and State B receives ”4”. The numbers represent the ranking of the outcomes, with number ”4” as the highest ranking and number ”1” as the lowest. The higher the number, the better is the outcome for each player. An important assumption in game theory is that players are
instrumentally rational. A player is rational if it maximises its utility, but there are some notions that need to be kept in mind concerning rationality. The meaning of rationality is subjective, and players can interpret rationality and evaluate outcomes differently. Therefore, calling a player rational is another way of saying that the player is purposeful and pursues a certain interest, that it itself defines. Rationality neither means that the player is necessarily intelligent in deciding its interest. Misinformation can lead a rational player to undertake unreasonable objectives. But as long as a player acts purposefully and in accordance with its interests, it is instrumentally rational. Rationality does not mean that players will always choose the outcome that serve their interests the best. This
State B Cooperate by not arming Defect by arming State A Cooperate by not arming CC (3,3) CD (1,4) Defect by arming DC (4,1) DD (2,2)
Figure 3.1 Prisoners’ dilemma as an arms
can be illustrated by the solution to the PD game, framed as an arms race, presented above with states as players (Zagare 2013: 50-51).
A solution to a strategic game is the best or optimal strategy for each player, leading to the most likely outcome of the game. For the arms race, the solution is outcome DD because both states have a strictly dominant strategy that, regardless of the other state’s selected strategy, leads to the best outcome for each state. If both states choose to cooperate by not arming, the second best outcome for both states is achieved (3,3), the outcome being a military balance at a low cost. However, if one state chooses to defect while the other chooses to cooperate, the state that defects gains a military advantage over the other state, leading to its best possible outcome (4). The state that chooses to cooperate ends up in the worst possible outcome (1), by having a military
disadvantage. So by choosing to cooperate, the states either end up in the worst possible outcome (1) or in second best outcome (3). Only by choosing to defect there is a chance to end up in the best outcome (4), or in the worst case, the next worst outcome (2). Therefore, defecting is the best strategy for each state regardless of the other player’s choice. This hinders states’ ability to commit themselves to a cause when they at the same time want to increase their own security. This is one part of the dilemma. The solution to the game illustrated in figure 3.1 is therefore outcome DD (Zagare 2013: 51-52).
This solution (outcome DD) to the PD is called Nash Equilibrium (NE). If a strategy pair is the NE, there is no incentive for either player to switch strategy (Zagare 2013: 52). This shows us that being a rational player does not always lead to the outcome that serves its best overall interest. By being rational, both players end up in the next worst outcome. If the players would have been irrational and instead chosen to commit to cooperating, they would both have reached the next best outcome. This is also part of the dilemma in PD. In this thesis, I will apply PD on an explanatory example to illustrate this dilemma (in this case, EED) and how it curbs states’ ability to commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environmental security. However, using PD to analyse the environmental security has been done before.
Marvin S. Soroos analyse climate change by applying the logic of PD. According to Soroos, the NE of such a game would be the outcome where states chose to take adaptive measures, like building sea walls to adapt to higher sea levels. This instead of cooperating with other states to reduce emission and prevent climate change. However, Soroos argues that PD does not fully explain climate change as well as it does explaining an arms race. This is because of two reasons. The first reason is because there is no apparent defense at any cost against a much larger environmental
catastrophe. In the arms race, a state can protect itself by arming and thereby enhancing its security. The resources invested in arming therefore assure some security, while resources invested in
adaptive measures do not assure any safety against larger environmental catastrophes. The second reason is that the outcome where one state chooses to cooperate by reducing emission and other states choose to build sea walls instead of reducing emission is not as bad in a PD game illustrating climate change as it is in a PD game illustrating an arms race game. In an arms race, this outcome is worse because if State A chooses to divert military resources and State B does not, State A will end up in a strategic disadvantage (outcome CD in figure 3.1). In a climate change PD, a state building sea walls poses no threat to other states regardless if they choose to reduce emission or take
adaptive measures (Soroos 1994: 327). However, the problem of a state ”free riding” on the benefits of other states’ emission reduction can still make PD applicable on states’ commitment regarding the protection of the environmental security. If a state chooses not to reduce emission while other states do, this state can enjoy the benefits from the other states’ reduction in emission without any cost. In this thesis, the problem of free riding will be included in the PD game used in the analysis.
Scott Barrett and Astrid Dannenberg’s research suggests that the problem of ”free riders” could be avoided by identifying a threshold for emission to avoid a catastrophic climate change with certainty. According to Barrett and Dannenberg, the current threshold used for the dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system is uncertain. Since this threshold is decided by nature and it is hard to simplify at witch stage or at witch value this threshold is surpassed, the threshold is uncertain. As their research show, conducted through an experiment with 400 participant, this uncertainty makes the actors prone to free ride because they do not know with certainty when the threshold is surpassed. This creates a situation reminding of a PD game where the players choose to defect from the cause of collective targeting to face the common problem, to increase their own interests instead (Barett & Dannenberg 2012: 17372-17375). However, when the threshold could be identified with certainty, a free riding behavior was disciplined and the players ”very likely would propose a collective target certain to avoid catastrophe, would pledge to contribute their fair share to the global effort, and would act so as to fulfill their promises” (Barett & Dannenberg 2012: 17375). In other words, they saw cooperation as necessary to avoid surpassing the threshold when the threshold was certain.
3.2 The advantages and limits of Prisoners’ Dilemma in this thesis
Before I continue with my analysis, I want to discuss some important notions regarding PD and game theory. Applying PD on a situation, as this thesis sets out to do, leads to a very pessimistic view regarding states’ ability to commit themselves to the cause of environmental protection. The dilemma that PD illustrates is the inability of states to be committed to a cause, because of their incentive to increase their own interest and security. However, it is important to keep in mind that PD is a frame I use to provide an explanation to the chosen example, not providing, as game theory would call it, a permanent solution. As a student of IR, an academic field engaged with studying and explaining international cooperation, I like to believe that my personal view on international
cooperation is less generalizing than the realist narrative or the liberal narrative regarding
cooperation. The realist strand being more pessimistic towards states’ ability to commit themselves to cooperation, while the liberal strand tends to be more optimistic toward states’ ability to stay committed to cooperation. I believe that the conditions that states’ commitment is taking place in are important. As Barett and Dannenberg’s research suggests, one important condition for states’ ability to commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environment is that states know at which level their emission will lead to consequences for them. The hardship for scientists to find this threshold seems to make it harder for states to stay committed to cooperation regarding the environment.
Therefore, I argue that framing the chosen case in this thesis as a PD game illustrates the conditions in the case that argues against states’ ability to commit themselves to certain causes. The purpose of this thesis is to counterargue Dalby’s claims by illustrating why the NSP is useful to provide understanding about climate change and other issues regarding the environmental security. This thesis does so by providing insights about the EED and how it can hinder states’ ability to commit to the cause of protecting the environment. Hence, PD is used to illustrate the EED and what choice a rational state should make when faced with this dilemma. As mentioned above, I like to think of myself as less generalizing and more nuanced when it comes to international
cooperation. This is the reasons to why I chose to use PD instead of a realist theory. In game theory, PD is a simplified way to illustrate a situation where self interest can create an obstacle for states’ ability to commit themselves to certain causes.
Also, the PD game in this thesis is used in the analysis by playing the game once. In his book The Evolution of Cooperation, Robert Axelrod points out that the solution to the PD game can
change if the players interact with each other an indefinite number of times, or when the players do not now when the last interaction between them is taking place. This means that the players’ choices are influenced by the likelihood of future interaction with the other players. Therefore, the future can affect the choices in the present, because the players can threat each other with retaliation in the future if the other player defects from cooperating in the present. Axelrod defines this phenomenon as the ”shadow of the future” (Axelrod 1984: 10, 12, 126). If you know that you will need to trade tomorrow again, it would be foolish to deceive the person you trade with today, because the person would not be interested in trading with you again if you deceived the person yesterday. The better choice in the present would then be to cooperate and build trust so you could trade again tomorrow. Under this condition, commitment to cooperation can emerge.
The idea of repeated PD games makes the game more realistic, since in the international community, states interact with each other again repeatedly. This could be seen as a critique against how I use PD, because I do not take repeated interactions into consideration in my analysis. I think this critique is legitimate. It would be interesting to make a study where repeated PD games are used. I believe that such a study could provide a more nuanced picture of the diplomacy between two states and the results could maybe be more optimistic about states’ ability to commit
themselves to a cause. However, the dilemma in PD still exists. Axelrod points out that a ”…variety of ways to resolve the Prisoner's Dilemma have been developed. Each involves allowing some additional activity that alters the strategic interaction in such a way as to fundamentally change the nature of the problem. The original problem remains, however, because there are many situations in which these remedies are not available” (Axelrod 1984: 11). Also, the purpose of this thesis is to counterargue Dalby’s claim by illustrating that the EED, highlighted by the NSP and PD, is important to keep in mind when analysing environmental security. This because the EED and its consequences can affect the climate change and the regional ecosystem in the Arctic. Therefore, I will only use a PD game played once to illustrate the EED.
4. Method
In this part, I discuss the method used in this thesis. I begin this part by discussing how the
explanatory example can help me make necessary limitations in my thesis and why this example is suitable to use. However, I also discuss a problem with the limitation made in my thesis. Also, the material used in this thesis is discussed. Thereafter, I review the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada.
4.1 Explanatory example and material
The purpose of this thesis is to counterargue Dalby’s claim that the NSP is not useful to explain current threats to the environmental security, and therefore, should be replaced by a global security perspective. I want to show how the NSP can be used to provide useful insights about current issues regarding the environmental security. This is the theoretical problem in my thesis. However, by showing how the NSP can be useful to explain issues regarding the environmental security, I will also provide insights about the empirical problem, being current issues regarding environmental security. To do this I argue that there is a EEN that puts states in a situation where they have to choose between their energy security and the environmental security. This was done in the summary of previous research. The EEN, in its turn, leads to the EED, which is illustrated by PD. The
hardship for states to commit themselves to the cause of protecting the environmental security, when they at the same time want to increase their own interests and security, is the core of the EED. This is what this thesis needs to provide insights about to achieve its purpose. By doing this, the thesis will show an important aspect of a challenge for states to commit to the cause of protecting the environmental security, caused by the EED, that the NSP together with PD can highlight.
To illustrate the EED and provide insights about how it curbs states’ ability to commit to the cause of protecting environmental security, I need to make limitations. To make necessary
limitations in my thesis, I will use an explanatory example. The chosen explanatory example is the strategic importance of the Northwest passage (NWP) for the U.S. and Canada. The strategic
importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada is a suitable example in my thesis because it can be linked to current issues and trends regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. In my analysis, it is argued that the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada can be affected by the strategy that the U.S. and Canada choose toward the current trends and issues
regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. PD will then be applied on the explanatory example to illustrate the EED and its consequences. In this PD game, the two states can either chose to enhance their own energy security, or commit to the protection of the environmental security. To provide understanding about the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada, I will make a historical overview in this part of my thesis.
This overview focuses on the icebreaking tanker SS Manhattan’s journeys through the NWP in the late 1960s and early 1970s. By studying Manhattan’s journeys in the NWP, useful
observations regarding the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada can be made. By using this explanatory example, I will be able to limit my research to two states and their interest. This will make it easier for me to use the PD to illustrate the EED, and provide insights about its consequences. Also, I will be able to make a geographical limitation. Instead of, for
example, focusing on the whole Arctic as a region I can put focus on the NWP and the Arctic part of Alaska and, thereby, make a limitation. By following this method I will provide an answer to the research question, which in turn will be useful to achieve this thesis’ purpose. The research question is the following: What insight can Prisoners’ Dilemma provide about the significance of states’ energy security and the environmental security regarding the strategic importance of the Northwest Passage for the U.S. and Canada? By answering this question I will both provide insights about the theoretical problem, which is to show the NSP’s ability to explain current issues regarding the environmental security, and the empirical problem, which consist of the issues per se regarding the environmental security. However, the limitation used in this thesis will exclude the Arctic council. The Arctic council is an intergovernmental forum that seeks to enhance cooperation and protect the Arctic environment and the sustainable development in the region (Ottawa Declaration 1996). The members of this forum are the U.S., Canada, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Russia. By excluding the Arctic council, I will exclude a lot of current processes regarding commitment to cooperation in the Arctic. However, to do this would require a study where eight states’ interest, instead of two states’ interest, would be taken into consideration. Also, the geographical area in the study would include the whole Arctic region. This is a task and scope to large to fit the extent of this thesis.
In this thesis, various data sources are used. Among the material used is a geological survey, policy documents, scientific journals and other academic literature. When discussing trends and issues regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security, a geological survey made by USGS, policy documents, scientific journals and other academic literature are being used as
material. To describe the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada, David Fairhall’s book Cold Front: Conflict Ahead in Arctic Waters is mainly used. This book provides a broad and general understanding of the ongoing processes and conflicts in the Arctic. However, academic journals are also used in the historical overview to provide additional important information and to strengthen claims by using more than one source for the same claim. To describe and discuss the usefulness of PD, a summary of game theory made by Machael Klare, and previous research on PD are used. The need to use various data sources is necessary to be able to accomplish the purpose of this thesis. In this thesis, I strive to use as many primary sources as possible to avoid interpretations of the results or arguments of the primary sources. This strive has led to the constant use of data from U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the survey made by USGS. These are two widely used sources in the academic literature regarding energy security and the Arctics’ increased importance in energy security thinking. EIA provides data and analysis about energy resources and sources. The survey made by USGS approximates the amount of different fossil resources in the Arctic.
4.2 The strategic importance of the Northwest passage for the U.S. and
Canada
The explanatory example used to make necessary limits in my thesis is the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada. In the following section, I will provide insights about the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada. The ice in the Arctic is melting and this makes new shipping routes available. One of these routes is the NWP through the Arctic
Archipelago. But even though ice reduction has increased in recent years, shipping through the NWP has a history. In 1969, the icebreaking tanker SS Manhattan, owned by the US-based Hubble oil company, set out from Pennsylvania and sailed through the Canadian archipelago to reach Prudhoe Bay oilfield in northern Alaska. Arriving there, one barrel of oil was loaded before taking the same route back. Even though the journey was completed, the most direct route proved
impassible and at one moment, the SS Manhattan needed assistance from the escorting icebreakers. In 1970, SS Manhattan tried again to sail in Arctic waters and this time the icebreaker did not even reach Prudhoe bay, because the ship sustained some damage to the stern (Fairhall 2010, 128-130).
SS Manhattan’s journeys are of interest for this study because three important observation
According to Fairhall, Manhattan had to go through a 40 million dollar makeover to be able to travel in Arctic climate (Fairhall 2010: 128). But even such an expensive makeover did not make the journey through the NWP easy. Even today, almost 50 years later with continuing trend in ice reduction, a harsh environment and seasonal ice cover complicates maritime operations in the Arctic (CBS Maritime 2016: 57-58). Second, these journeys tested a route and transportation method for the Alaskan produced crude oil. The Hubble oil company wanted to test shipping crude oil through the NWP because they though this method would be cheaper than building a pipeline from north to south Alaska (Fairhall 2010: 129-130). The harsh Arctic climate proved them wrong. Nowadays, crude oil produced in northern Alaska is being transported through the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) down south to a warm water port at Valdez. However, when it comes to natural gas, there is no effective transportation method. Most of the natural gas produced in Alaska is never brought to a market. The state government of Alaska wants to build a natural gas pipeline that connects the northern gas production with other markets in the U.S. This production would require an 800 mile long pipeline from Alaska’s north slope down to Alaska’s south coast; a production that would cost billions of dollars and would only be worth investing in, according to the EIA, if
hydrocarbon commodity prices would increase (EIA 2017b). So, an easy navigable NWP would be a useful passage for the U.S. to ship fossil resources extracted in the Arctic part of Alaska (APA), that would reduce the U.S.’s need to build expensive pipelines through Alaska. However, the current climate in the NWP makes this route hard to use for these purposes.
The third reason that Manhattan’s journeys in 1969-1970 are of interest for this study has to do with the consequences that the journeys had on Canada’s policy toward the Arctic archipelago. In response to the SS Manhattan’s journeys, Canada enacted the Arctic Water Pollution Prevention Act (AWPPA) in 1970, witch established demanding pollution standards on any ship passing through the NWP. Some years later, in 1985, a U.S. Coast Guard icebreaker named Polar sea used the NWP when sailing from Greenland to Alaska without, according to Canada, getting permission. Some weeks later, Canada enclosed the NWP by a legislation claiming that the Arctic Archipelago is Canada’s internal water. Canada still does this today. This, strategically, means that Canada can control which ships pass through the NWP. However, the U.S. dispute this claim, instead claiming that the NWP is an international strait open to shipping. The strategic interest of the U.S. is to be able to use the NWP for transportation. As can be seen from the historical overview, this passage could be used to ship crude oil and other fossil resources from the APA down south to the U.S. east coast (Briggs 1990: 437-443, Fairhall 2010: 31-32, 133 & Nolin 2017: 341-343)
ForCanada, the strategic interest is to keep the NWP as their internal water because they want to sustain the security of the remote and immense Arctic region (Fairhall 2010: 31-32, 121, Nolin 2017: 341-343, Pharand 2007: 28, 46). However, Donat Pharand also argues that Canada wants to protect the fragile marine ecosystem, the Inuits and other habitants in the region, whose lifestyles are dependent on the preservation of the environment. If the NWP would become a subject to uncontrolled shipping of fossil resources in the region, the ecosystem’s security could be threatened by the risk of an oil spill. Canada, according to Pharand, wants to be able to put certain measures on shipping through the NWP, which they could do if the passage would become
classified as their internal water (Pharand 2007: 46).
However, if we apply the same logic that Cao and Bluth used when they studied China’s energy policy, it can be argued that it would be strategic for Canada to hinder the U.S. from establishing a new domestic source to energy. In 2014, Canada was the world’s fifth-largest oil producer and a net exporter of oil. Energy exports to the U.S. account for a vast majority of Canada’s total energy export. In 2016, Canada accounted for 41% of the U.S.’s crude oil imports and was the U.S.’s largest partner in energy trade (EIA 2015 & EIA 2017c). If the U.S. could
establish another domestic source of energy by extracting fossil resources in the APA, Canada could lose some of the influence it gains by being an important partner in energy trade with the U.S. Keeping the NWP as internal water, with strict measures on fossil resource shipping through the passage, could undermine the U.S.’s ability to use the NWP to ship fossil resources extracted in the APA. According to this logic, it would be more strategic for Canada to keep the passage as their internal water.
5. Analysis
In this part, I perform my analysis. I begin this part by describing how the strategic importance of the NWP for the U.S. and Canada can be affected by the strategy that the U.S. and Canada choose toward the current trends and issues regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. This is done to link the example to trends and issue regarding states’ energy security and the environmental security. I also define the benefit that states gain by reducing the total amount of emission. After this, I apply PD on the explanatory example to illustrate the EED and the