Multilateral solutions for resolving Arctic disputes starts with U.S. ratification of UNCLOS to be better to strengthen and guide multilateral fora

This Author contends that the ideal model for solving the issues of Arctic jurisdiction combines elements of the multilateral solutions detailed above. An excellent first step would be for the United States to ratify UNCLOS, so that it may participate in the CLCS claim system so as to strengthen the force of CLCS decisions under customary international law.¹³³ Admittedly, with the partisan deadlock in the US legislature, it may be some time before the Americans join UNCLOS. Ultimately, this Author concludes that a realist approach (and courses of action in line with that approach) to the Arctic situation would be the best for the continued stability of the region. For example, military, political, and energy concerns have become so intertwined that it would be difficult to analyze each interest separately vis-a-vis the Arctic.¹³⁴ Thus, public international law should make like the proverbial pedestrian in front of a bus and should just get out of the way. Otherwise, if public international law stands opposite practical considerations, then states will have to make a difficult and damaging choice between the health of the international legal system and their own important interests. But that does not mean that international law should be emasculated, the previous contention simply rejects a formalist insistence on the primacy of public international law, rather, compliance with international law is of equal concern to the Arctic states in line with other concerns like cheap energy, secure borders, and a healthy environment. Thus, international jurists should encourage cooperation and the implementation of legal mechanisms when it is appropriate.