270
Arctic Yearbook 2013
Strengthening the Capacity of the Arctic Council
in the role that observers can play in the AC, and in particular in the possibility that they may acquire
a greater role than Arctic States and PPS. These criteria focus on achieving a balance firstly between
the necessary participation of observers, who cannot be absent in the only forum that promotes the
cooperation in the Arctic, especially if we consider that we are referring to non-Arctic States or IO
who, for different reasons, are especially interested in this zone; and secondly, the role of the Arctic
States who, together with the PPs, are the ―leading actors‖ of this Forum of cooperation.
Therefore, on the basis of the above-mentioned
Role and Criteria for Observers to the AC,
on the
occasion of the Eighth Ministerial Meeting of the AC, China, India, Italy, Japan, the Republic of
Korea and Singapore were admitted as new observer States
26
(Kiruna Declaration, 2013: 6). By
contrast the AC ―(…) receives the application of the EU for observer status affirmatively, but defers
a final decision on implementation until the Council ministers are agreed by consensus that the
concerns of Council members, addressed by the President of the European Commission in his letter
of 8 May are resolved, with the understanding that the EU may observe Council proceedings until
such time as the Council acts on the letter‘s proposal‖. Catherine Ashton, High Representative of
the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and EU Commissioner for Maritime
Affairs and Fisheries, Maria Damaniki, made the following statement with regard to this decision:
The EU welcomes the Arctic Council‘s decision on the EU‘s application for
permanent observership. The EU considers the Arctic Council a primary
international forum for Arctic cooperation and looks forward to stepping up its
engagement with the Arctic partners in tackling the challenges faced by this region of
increasing importance. Further to previous exchanges with the Canadian authorities,
the EU will now work expeditiously with them to address the outstanding issue of
their concern.
27
Here the question is whether or not the AC should deny the status of observer to the European
Union. To a certain degree
,
the European Union is already represented in the AC through its
members and observers which, in turn, are members of the EU; however, taking into account its
competences and the diverse actions adopted about this region, ―the EU as a legal person should be
distinguished from its member states‖ (Koivurova, Kokko, Duyck, Sellheim and Stepien, 2012: 368).
Finally, it is important to mention the adoption of the AC
Manual for Subsidiary Bodies
(Kiruna, 2013)
.
While an examination of this Manual goes beyond the scope of this article, it should be noted that
its goal is to establish the role of observers with a fundamental purpose: to maintain the direction of
the AC for its members and PPs, as defined from the Ottawa to the Kiruna Declarations. In
particular, point 6 states that
―the primary role of observers is to observe the work of the AC.
Furthermore, observers are encouraged to continue to make relevant contributions through their
engagement primarily at the level of working groups‖.
The Nature of the Decisions Taken in the Arctic Council
The SAOs pointed out in their Report to Ministers (Nuuk 2011: 49-50) that ―the AC will continue
to work towards solutions to address emerging challenges in the Arctic utilizing a wide range of
approaches, including scientific assessments; policy statements; guidelines, recommendations; best
practices; and new legally binding instruments. Working Groups will remain the principal means for