Canada – United States of America Beaufort Sea Boundary Negotiations: Current Issues and Prospects

INTRODUCTION. With the polar regions becoming ice-free and scientific data on the hydrocarbon potential of the Arctic continental shelf increasing, the issue of a fair delimitation between the United States of America (U.S.) and Canada in the Beaufort Sea is becoming more acute. On September 24, 2024, both governments announced new delimitation negotiations (including the continental shelf). However, the U.S. is not party to the 1982 United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea. Furthermore, there are still no recommendations from the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf regarding Canada’s submission about the outer limits of its shelf. Therefore, a question arises about the viability and legitimacy of a final agreement on the delimitation of the Beaufort Sea from an international law perspective. In this article, the author shares his perspective on this issue. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This study is based on scientific developments by Russian and foreign international lawyers, particularly over the past five years. The legal framework includes delimitation treaties between Arctic coastal states and decisions of International Court of Justice and international arbitral tribunals on delimitation issues. The methodology used includes general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, comparison, classification, systematization, and forecasting) as well as specific scientific methods (including formal legal analysis, comparative legal methods, and legal hermeneutics). RESEARCH RESULTS. The author concludes that the creation of the joint task force to undertake negotiations on the maritime boundary in the Beaufort Sea is occurring in the context of climate change, which has heightened the region's economic importance and made the need for legal certainty more pressing. At the same time, several previous obstacles to negotiations have now become irrelevant. The current geopolitical context additionally stimulates the parties' interest in a peaceful settlement of the dispute. The paper argues that nothing in principle prevents the two states from undertaking continental-shelf delimitation beyond 200 nautical miles. Looking ahead, a central question will be how any bilateral settlement incorporates the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf’s recommendations for Canada. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The current environment, in contrast to previous negotiations, appears favorable to a mutually acceptable outcome. Nevertheless, several legal uncertainties persist—chief among them the method for delimiting areas beyond 200 nautical miles. At the same time, the absence of a recommendation from the CLCS to Canada may delay reaching a final agreement or lead to the development of temporary solutions. In general, despite the favorable political context, the author believes it is premature to discuss the possibility of a quick conclusion to the negotiations.