Unrealistic to expect that CLCS will be able to resolve existing Arctic disputes

Another potential avenue could be to just let the problem “work itself out”. Consider the following: At the time of the USGS CARA study, geologists believed that most of the energy resources available for exploitation reside on the continental shelf.¹²⁸ With four of the five coastal states as signatories of UNCLOS, a solution to the Arctic “problem” could be as easy as letting the CLCS adjudicate the claims in an orderly manner.¹²⁹ If the CLCS could settle the disputed territory, then the Arctic conflicts would probably evaporate. Unfortunately, there may be little likelihood of this occurring. Given the snail's pace at which the CLCS resolves claims, the impending political and economic incentives for asserting a national presence in the Arctic, and the possibility that CLCS judgments may be unenforceable under customary international law, it is unlikely that such a course is a legally viable one. Furthermore, the USGS CARA study did not include in its survey “unconventional” sources of energy, one of which was oil/gas derived from shale.¹³⁰ Perhaps, the Arctic may contain more energy resources than anyone may currently believe, and, in such a case, no CLCS adjudication would be likely to work in the face of such a stark new reality.