| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.84 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Desde o final da Guerra Fria que o Ártico permaneceu uma região na qual as tensões
políticas tinham um valor muito residual, havendo uma enorme primazia pela
manutenção da estabilidade, cooperação e paz. Esta particularidade do Ártico ser,
aparentemente, uma região imune às tensões políticas que marcam a natureza anárquica
do sistema internacional foi conotada com o termo Excecionalismo Ártico. Quando, a
propósito da expedição científica russa Arktika 2007, a Federação Russa decide
implantar uma bandeira de titânio no fundo do Oceano Ártico, muito próximo do Pólo
Norte, foi um claro sinal para o sistema internacional que a era em que o Ártico detinha
a capacidade de resistir às ambições estratégicas dos Estados podia estar perto do fim. A
abundância de recursos naturais, nomeadamente petróleo e gás natural; o acesso à
Northern Sea Route que conecta a Ásia Oriental com a Europa Ocidental de uma forma
muito mais eficiente do que qualquer outra rota marítima e o facto de ser a única região
que reúne fisicamente os EUA, a Federação Russa e a China, têm contribuído para o
retorno do Ártico como prioridade estratégica dos Estados.
A Federação Russa enquanto o maior Estado Ártico tem assumido uma postura
particularmente assertiva e, em algumas circunstâncias, fraturante com o status quo da
região. A presente investigação pretende realizar uma análise à militarização russa no
Ártico enquanto objeto das preocupações securitárias dos restantes sete Estados Árticos
(em breve todos Estados Membros da Aliança Atlântica). Mesmo que as capacidades
militares russas alocadas ao Ártico sirvam propósitos defensivos, a sua capacidade de
rapidamente se converterem em meios ofensivos constituem uma ameaça à estabilidade
da região. Realisticamente, um conflito no Ártico não é, aparentemente, um prospeto
desejável pelo Kremlin. Contudo, determinadas atividades militares desenvolvidas no
Ártico mostram algum revisionismo, assim como um instrumento de projeção de poder
e uma afirmação da Federação Russa enquanto grande potência e ator dominante na
região.
Esta investigação conclui que um conflito militar no Ártico pode ocorrer fruto de tensões
internas ou pelo alastramento de tensões exógenas à região. Uma escalada vertical de
tensões políticas e militares pode surgir através da disputa territorial para garantia do
acesso a reservas de hidrocarbonetos; do aumento da navegabilidade da Northern Sea
Route, e a tensão política decorrente da sua internacionalização, ou devido à tensão
dilemática que encerra o dilema de segurança. Já uma escalada horizontal veria um
conflito que surge fora do Ártico chegar à região através do alastramento de tensões
políticas para a região e ativação das capacidades militares in situ. Neste segundo cenário, a região do Báltico poderá ser o ground zero para o primeiro conflito militar no
Ártico, sensivelmente 30 anos após o fim da Guerra Fria.
Since the end of the Cold War, the Arctic stayed as a region where political tensions had a very residual meaning, as there was a primacy for political stability, cooperation and peace. The distinctiveness of the Arctic as a political region to apparently be immune to political tensions in an anarchic international system was known as the Arctic Exceptionalism. However, during the Russian scientific expedition Arktika 2007, the Russian Federation planted a Russian flag made of titanium on the bottom of the seabed, close to the North Pole. This was a clear warning to the international system that the era of exceptionalism in the Arctic as its ability to resist the states’ strategic ambitions may be coming to an end. The abundance of natural resources, namely oil and natural gas; the access to the Northern Sea Route which connects East Asia to Western Europe much more efficiently than any other maritime route and the fact that is the only political region where the USA, the Russian Federation and China physically meet, are strong contributors to the return of the Arctic as a strategic priority to Western states. The Russian Federation, the largest state in the Arctic, has been assuming a particularly assertive approach towards the region and, in some circumstances, has been showing a fracturing divergence to the status quo that is typically associated with the Arctic region. The present investigation aims to study the Russian militarization in the Arctic as an object of security concern to the remaining seven Arctic states (soon to be seven NATO allies). Even if the military capabilities allocated to the Arctic region serve a defensive purpose, its ability to rapidly switch to an offensive purpose is threatening to the political stability of the region and an active trigger to the security dilemma. Realistically a military conflict in the Arctic is not a desirable prospect for the Kremlin. However, there are certain Russian military activities executed in the Arctic that may reveal some revisionism and may act as an instrument of power projection to confidently claim a great power status in the region. A military threat in the Arctic may result from internal political tensions or from an exogenous conflict that spreads into the region. A vertical escalation may occur through territorial disputes to claim full control over hydrocarbon reserves, due to increased navigability of the Northern Sea Route and the divergence between Arctic states over its navigability status, or even the culmination of the security dilemma. On the other hand, a vertical escalation would see a military conflict or severe political tensions outside the Arctic come to the region through military geographical expansion, geopolitical spillover or the deployment of capabilities already in situ. In this second scenario, the Baltic political region could be the ground zero to the first military conflict in the Arctic, sensibly 30 years after the end of the Cold War.
Since the end of the Cold War, the Arctic stayed as a region where political tensions had a very residual meaning, as there was a primacy for political stability, cooperation and peace. The distinctiveness of the Arctic as a political region to apparently be immune to political tensions in an anarchic international system was known as the Arctic Exceptionalism. However, during the Russian scientific expedition Arktika 2007, the Russian Federation planted a Russian flag made of titanium on the bottom of the seabed, close to the North Pole. This was a clear warning to the international system that the era of exceptionalism in the Arctic as its ability to resist the states’ strategic ambitions may be coming to an end. The abundance of natural resources, namely oil and natural gas; the access to the Northern Sea Route which connects East Asia to Western Europe much more efficiently than any other maritime route and the fact that is the only political region where the USA, the Russian Federation and China physically meet, are strong contributors to the return of the Arctic as a strategic priority to Western states. The Russian Federation, the largest state in the Arctic, has been assuming a particularly assertive approach towards the region and, in some circumstances, has been showing a fracturing divergence to the status quo that is typically associated with the Arctic region. The present investigation aims to study the Russian militarization in the Arctic as an object of security concern to the remaining seven Arctic states (soon to be seven NATO allies). Even if the military capabilities allocated to the Arctic region serve a defensive purpose, its ability to rapidly switch to an offensive purpose is threatening to the political stability of the region and an active trigger to the security dilemma. Realistically a military conflict in the Arctic is not a desirable prospect for the Kremlin. However, there are certain Russian military activities executed in the Arctic that may reveal some revisionism and may act as an instrument of power projection to confidently claim a great power status in the region. A military threat in the Arctic may result from internal political tensions or from an exogenous conflict that spreads into the region. A vertical escalation may occur through territorial disputes to claim full control over hydrocarbon reserves, due to increased navigability of the Northern Sea Route and the divergence between Arctic states over its navigability status, or even the culmination of the security dilemma. On the other hand, a vertical escalation would see a military conflict or severe political tensions outside the Arctic come to the region through military geographical expansion, geopolitical spillover or the deployment of capabilities already in situ. In this second scenario, the Baltic political region could be the ground zero to the first military conflict in the Arctic, sensibly 30 years after the end of the Cold War.
Description
Keywords
Ártico Capacidades Militares Conflito Dilema de Segurança Estratégia Federação Russa Geopolítica Tensão Política