This interview is part of a series of interviews with academics and practitioners at an early stage in their careers. The interviews discuss current research and projects, as well as advice for other early-career researchers.
Zachary Lavengood is a fourth-year doctoral student at the Institute of International Studies at Charles University, Department of North American Studies. His research focuses on Arctic and Eurasian geopolitics, with a particular focus on hotspots and geopolitical developments due to climate change. His published works include: The evolution of the Arctic in the world system, China and the Arctic in the 21st century: opportunities and limitsAnd Review of the South China Sea dispute with general morphological analysis
What (or who) caused the most significant changes in your thinking or encouraged you to pursue your area of research?
Immanuel Wallerstein has had a significant impact on my academic thinking, I might even go so far as to call myself a fanboy. I first discovered his work while I was preparing for my Master’s program, in an international relations textbook that I picked up in a second-hand bookstore. Excerpts from his writings piqued my interest and over the next few years I read his works. Her world-systems theory and ability to analyze global affairs from an Archimedean perspective, as well as the frankness with which she spoke about inequality and exploitation, changed my view of the world around me. His preference for objectivity over idealism continued to shape my research.
What geopolitical challenges and opportunities do you see emerging in the Arctic region? What impact could this have on international relations in the years to come?
The Arctic is experiencing a fundamental shift in its identity, moving from a secondary geopolitical consideration to a growing facet of the grand strategy of many states. This is due to climate change which has shifted the region from one of frigid predictability to seasonal climate extremes; With this development comes an abundance of new opportunities such as resources revealed in ice, long-sought shipping routes across Eurasia, and a burgeoning tourism industry. However, this comes at a price: climate change taking place in the Arctic, the fastest warming region on the planet, if left unchecked, will cause significant environmental impacts across the global system, under form of important geophysical processes (such as ocean currents or polar albedo). effect) are endangered; Unfortunately, this situation is likely to continue as the global community drags its feet in the fight against climate change.
Meanwhile, states will begin to assert their interests in the region, which could potentially increase tensions. This situation is compounded by the fact that the Arctic Council, the region’s premier multilateral forum, has become inert due to the fallout from the war in Ukraine. It is important to remember that the region only internationalized after the Cold War and therefore does not have a track record for dealing with fluctuations in tensions like many others across the global system. While this is concerning, it should not necessarily be considered existential. Even if relations may freeze again, as they did before 1991, the Arctic is an incredibly difficult environment to manage from a security perspective. It is for this reason that much of the military infrastructure in the High North is defensive in nature, meaning the region as a whole is less susceptible to open conflict; it is more difficult to shake a shield than a saber.
What makes the Arctic important to China? How do these interests impact the priorities and decisions made by China in the region?
China is a rising power on the world stage and is looking for a way to make a name for itself in the global system or, in more academic terms, it is looking for prestige. The Arctic is a region where it sees opportunities to expand its influence and acquire this prestige, which has prompted Beijing to insert itself into the regional dynamic with the self-adhered status of a “state close to the Arctic”, in accordance with its White Paper on Arctic Policy (published in 2018). They successfully became observers at the Arctic Council in 2013 and have since inserted themselves into numerous Track II dialogues in the region, foremost among which are scientific activities to which China devotes significant funds, both with the aim of deepening his understanding of the Arctic. environment, but also as a means of fostering relations with other States and their scientific communities. The region is also rich in many resources (mainly hydrocarbons) that China needs to maintain its energy-hungry economy and above all presents an opportunity to diversify its energy portfolio; this is a strategic concern given that in the event of conflict in its home region (such as the South China Sea), its supplies from the Middle East could be disrupted and limit its ability to support its economic/military.
Despite its claim to be a near-Arctic state, China is well aware of its lack of action in the region and suspicions that the eight Arctic states, particularly the coastal states, view outsiders with less roar dragon than before and approach the Arctic with less dragon roar than before. its region of origin. China’s largest partner in the Arctic is Russia and has used this relationship to gain a foothold in the Arctic, largely through bilateral agreements and agreements between Beijing and Moscow, which can give China the opportunity to interact in the Arctic without appearing assertive (for example). example the Yamal LNG project). However, this trend is currently muted due to the war in Ukraine, which has led to Russia being excluded from most multilateral engagements in the region. This also means that China’s position has been weakened in the High North and that it must be careful in its partnerships with Russia in the region (especially technological exchanges and investments/resource purchases), lest it attract the anger of the sanctions-happy West.
Will the Northern Sea Route and Arctic waters be able to compete economically with the South China Sea in the future? Why how?
At the moment this is unlikely. Even though the Northern Sea Route (NSR) is now more open to traffic than ever before, it still has significant disadvantages compared to traditional sea routes which are often not worth the time and cost advantages of the route. navigation along the NSR. Most important is its limited (although increasingly broad) navigation season, which is only open when there is no sea ice, or thin enough, for safe transits; Particularly at the ends of the shipping season, rapid changes in weather can cause ships to get stuck in ice (as happened in November 2021). In addition, Russia has implemented a strict regime of regulations for ships sailing along the NSR, including the use of Russian pilots, insurance requirements, fees, etc., which may lead to many shipping companies to look elsewhere where there are fewer complications. But then again, in times of geopolitical extremes, NSR could prove useful in avoiding areas like the South China Sea, where ships are more vulnerable to hostile navies. Currently, NSR is used more for “shipment to destination” (shipping to/from a port along the route) as opposed to “shipment in transit” (shipment from an Asian port to a port European or vice versa), a trend that is expected to continue for the foreseeable future. However, the NSR is certainly on the radar of commercial companies who will use this route more if it becomes more profitable.
Why is a global systems perspective useful for analyzing current events in the Arctic?
The Arctic is a dynamic region that is best viewed from a broad perspective, capable of showing the connections that other regions of the world have with the Far North. World systems analysis allows observers to avoid traditional academic barriers that would limit the connection of analysis from one region to another, or focus only on economics or only on politics; The flexible scope of analysis is what makes global systems analysis so useful in providing objective empirical research, and the Arctic is no exception. As the region becomes increasingly internationalized and more active due to climate change, it is important for observers to maintain a comprehensive understanding of Arctic geopolitical processes, which is possible through global systems analysis.
What are you currently working on?
I am currently completing my doctoral dissertation which focuses on a deeper understanding of geopolitical hotspots as social phenomena. In this dissertation, I use the Arctic and the South China Sea as case studies for competition and conflict hotspots respectively, focusing on the diplomatic, economic, and security factors that contributed to the creation and the perpetuation of these hot spots. In this work, I create a typology of hotspots that I hope will find use in the fields of conflict studies and conflict mitigation.
What is the most important advice you could give to other young academics or early careers?
I would encourage young researchers and early career researchers to maintain an independent mindset in their research; don’t take sides or try to support political/national discourses, there are already many in the world. What helps us move forward is objective research that presents the world as it really is, for better or worse, so that we, as a global community, can work to solve the persistent problems of 20th century and 21st century evolving problems that humanity must face to ensure a better future for all.
Further reading on international electronic relations
