It is beyond the scope of this chapter to analyse the extensive theoretical literature
on the causal relationship between international law and international politics.
Rather, it assumes that a constructivist approach applies, and that, at the very least,
international law sets expectations of appropriate conduct for the society of nations.
States both pre-empt and react to the perceptions of the international community,
such that international law has the potential to mould conduct.
143 International
politics do not merely reflect distributions of power; rather, they can influence this
distribution, due to the social dimension of power in the international community.
144
The authors argue that the law of the sea, as applied by relevant tribunals,
correlates with compliant conduct by Russia. Russia benefits from the regime,
145
and compliance is typically expedient. Although this suggests that legal mechanisms
may only encourage Russia’s compliance where there is no reason to act contrarily,
this is often sufficient.
146
4.1 Compliance and the Arctic Sunrise Arbitration
Russia’s conduct surrounding the Arctic Sunrise arbitration exemplifies compliance
correlated with legal determinations, and contextualised by legally informed international perceptions.
4.1.1 Russia’s Compliance with the Order for Provisional Measures
The Netherlands’ initiation of dispute resolution processes under UNCLOS, and the
determination by ITLOS at the provisional measures stage, correlate strongly with
compliant conduct by Russia. First, on 23 October 2013, the same day that ITLOS’
registry received Russia’s note verbale detailing its jurisdictional challenge,
147 and
two days after the Netherlands sent its request for provisional measures to ITLOS,
148
143 See generally Kratochwil (2014), and Brunnée and Toope (2010).
144 Bower (2017), p. 4. See generally Barnett and Duvall (2005).
145 For example, Russia was the first State to claim an extension of its continental shelf in the Arctic
pursuant to Art. 76(8) of UNCLOS: UN Office of Legal Affairs, ‘Submissions’ (2018). See http://
www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.html. More broadly, the USSR
supported UNCLOS as a means for guaranteeing its rights (in particular, the navigational rights
of its military): Klein (2005), p. 18. See also Karev (1995).
146 In the context of Russia’s establishment of its continental shelf in the Arctic, for example, it has
been commented that the nature of its claims ‘proves that Russia is interested in following the legal
path and international cooperation in the Arctic, at least as long as it serves Russia’s interests’: Zysk
(2016), p. 150.
147 ITLOS (Arctic Sunrise), Press Release of 25 October 2013: https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/
documents/press_releases_english/PR_202_E.pdf.
148 ITLOS (Arctic Sunrise), Press Release of 21 October 2013: https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/
documents/press_releases_english/PR_201_E.pdf.
16 Implementing the Law of the Sea: Russia and Arbitrations Under Annex VII to. . .
303
on the causal relationship between international law and international politics.
Rather, it assumes that a constructivist approach applies, and that, at the very least,
international law sets expectations of appropriate conduct for the society of nations.
States both pre-empt and react to the perceptions of the international community,
such that international law has the potential to mould conduct.
143 International
politics do not merely reflect distributions of power; rather, they can influence this
distribution, due to the social dimension of power in the international community.
144
The authors argue that the law of the sea, as applied by relevant tribunals,
correlates with compliant conduct by Russia. Russia benefits from the regime,
145
and compliance is typically expedient. Although this suggests that legal mechanisms
may only encourage Russia’s compliance where there is no reason to act contrarily,
this is often sufficient.
146
4.1 Compliance and the Arctic Sunrise Arbitration
Russia’s conduct surrounding the Arctic Sunrise arbitration exemplifies compliance
correlated with legal determinations, and contextualised by legally informed international perceptions.
4.1.1 Russia’s Compliance with the Order for Provisional Measures
The Netherlands’ initiation of dispute resolution processes under UNCLOS, and the
determination by ITLOS at the provisional measures stage, correlate strongly with
compliant conduct by Russia. First, on 23 October 2013, the same day that ITLOS’
registry received Russia’s note verbale detailing its jurisdictional challenge,
147 and
two days after the Netherlands sent its request for provisional measures to ITLOS,
148
143 See generally Kratochwil (2014), and Brunnée and Toope (2010).
144 Bower (2017), p. 4. See generally Barnett and Duvall (2005).
145 For example, Russia was the first State to claim an extension of its continental shelf in the Arctic
pursuant to Art. 76(8) of UNCLOS: UN Office of Legal Affairs, ‘Submissions’ (2018). See http://
www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.html. More broadly, the USSR
supported UNCLOS as a means for guaranteeing its rights (in particular, the navigational rights
of its military): Klein (2005), p. 18. See also Karev (1995).
146 In the context of Russia’s establishment of its continental shelf in the Arctic, for example, it has
been commented that the nature of its claims ‘proves that Russia is interested in following the legal
path and international cooperation in the Arctic, at least as long as it serves Russia’s interests’: Zysk
(2016), p. 150.
147 ITLOS (Arctic Sunrise), Press Release of 25 October 2013: https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/
documents/press_releases_english/PR_202_E.pdf.
148 ITLOS (Arctic Sunrise), Press Release of 21 October 2013: https://www.itlos.org/fileadmin/itlos/
documents/press_releases_english/PR_201_E.pdf.
16 Implementing the Law of the Sea: Russia and Arbitrations Under Annex VII to. . .
303