The Russia-USA legal dispute over the straits of the Northern Sea Route and similar case of the Northwest Passage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the legal status of the Northern Sea Route (NSR), which has been a subject of dispute between the Soviet Union\Russia and the United States for over fifty years. The main legal issue of the analysis is the question whether straits of the Northern Sea Route are international, where the freedom of navigation applies, or whether the straits are internal waters of Russia and they are subjected to national rules of navigation. The case of the Northern Sea Route straits is considered from a historical perspective and with references to relevant provisions of the contemporary international law of the sea. A similar dispute between Canada and the USA over the Northwest Passage is assessed as well. The author concludes that the USA has a disadvantageous position in the disputes due to difficulties in proving that both routes can meet necessary criteria for international straits developed by the international law. So far, the debate on legal status of the NSR waters is more of theoretical nature and has no practical implications. However, the situation might change with the Arctic sea ice melting and Russia planning to use the NSR on a much larger international scale.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".