A climate crisis in the Arctic is not a future scenario, it is happening as we speak. Analyse in context of Arctic council. (200 Words)
Refer - Reuters
Enrich the answer from other sources, if the question demands.
IAS Parliament 5 years
KEY POINTS
· A meeting of eight nations bordering the Arctic in Rovaniemi in Finland was supposed to frame a two-year agenda to balance the challenge of global warming with sustainable development of mineral wealth.
· But the United States cancelled first time, a declaration since the Arctic Council was formed in 1996.
· Moreover the agreements between countries in the Arctic Council are non-binding.
· The Arctic Council is a forum; it has no programming budget. All projects or initiatives are sponsored by one or more Arctic States. Some projects also receive support from other entities. Hence the council is dependent on the member states.
· The Arctic Council does not and cannot implement or enforce its guidelines, assessments or recommendations. That responsibility belongs to each individual Arctic State.
· The Arctic Council’s mandate, as articulated in the Ottawa Declaration, explicitly excludes military security.
· With Arctic temperatures rising at twice the rate of the rest of the globe, the melting ice is creating potential new shipping lanes and has opened much of the world’s last untapped reserves of oil and gas to commercial exploitation.
· In this scenario Arctic council has a crucial role to play in preserving the pristine arctic ecosystem and needs to mobilize the co-operation among the members for effective implementation of measures to protect arctic region.
SARI 5 years
Please Review.........
IAS Parliament 5 years
Need better understanding. Provide arguments on the protection of arctic region with respect to arctic council.Ex: council lacks enforcement mechanisms, non-binding. Try to provide some points USA cancelling Rovaniemi declaration and its impact. Keep Writing
