Introduction

According to a Jiji Press report of 30 September 2024 [1], concerns were expressed in Japan regarding Russia’s regulation of navigation along the Northern Sea Route (NSR), particularly in the context of the 2024 amendments to the Rules of Navigation in the Water Area of the Northern Sea Route. These amendments were introduced by Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 97 of 31 January 2024 to the Rules originally approved by Government Resolution No. 1487 of 18 September 2020. A substantial part of the amendments entered into force on 1 September 2024. The report also referred to Japan’s approach to promoting a «Free and Open Arctic» [1]. The concerns presented in the Japanese discussion appear to reflect the perception that, under the authority to protect the marine environment in ice-covered areas stipulated in Article 234 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Russia is strengthening its control over shipping routes, navigation guidance, and regulatory frameworks through its domestic legal system.

From this perspective, Russia’s regulatory measures may be interpreted in Japan as an attempt to strengthen national control over foreign access to the NSR and to consolidate its presence in the Arctic. At the same time, Japanese concerns should also be considered in the broader context of the principles of freedom of navigation, the efficiency of international shipping, and the additional costs and time associated with compliance with Russian regulations. Thus, differences between the Russian and Japanese approaches reflect not only political considerations but also different perceptions of the relationship between freedom of navigation, coastal-state jurisdiction, navigational safety, and environmental protection in the Arctic.

From the Russian perspective, however, the development of the Arctic and the NSR is closely connected with the export of natural resources and the development of international economic, technological, and scientific cooperation [2, 3]. The international Yamal LNG project and the Snowflake International Arctic Station initiative illustrate the importance attached to international participation in Arctic development. In this context, the navigation of foreign vessels along the NSR under safe and environmentally responsible conditions can contribute to the development of the Russian Arctic and to broader international cooperation.

Accordingly, Russia’s strengthening of navigation management, pilotage, and regulatory mechanisms has been justified [4], inter alia, by reference to its jurisdiction for the protection of the marine environment in ice-covered areas under Article 234 of UNCLOS. From the author’s perspective, these measures should therefore be considered not only in terms of national control over the NSR but also in relation to navigational safety and environmental protection. At the same time, the author acknowledges that such an interpretation may be perceived in Japan as being overly sympathetic to the Russian position. This divergence itself constitutes an important research problem: the same regulatory measures can be interpreted differently depending on political, legal, economic, and scientific perspectives.

Against this background, the purpose of this article is to examine how scientific cooperation can contribute to overcoming differences in Russian and Japanese perceptions of the regulation of navigation along the Northern Sea Route and to assess the potential of science diplomacy as a mechanism for maintaining bilateral Arctic cooperation. The central research question is: to what extent can scientific cooperation and science diplomacy contribute to reducing differences between Russian and Japanese approaches to navigation, safety, and environmental protection along the Northern Sea Route?

The study adopts a qualitative analytical approach, combining an examination of the legal and environmental dimensions of NSR navigation with the author’s professional observations and experience of Russian-Japanese scientific interaction. Particular attention is paid to the scientific evidence underlying navigation management and environmental protection measures in the Arctic. The article argues that scientific dialogue and joint research can provide an important channel for building mutual understanding even when broader political relations remain constrained. On this basis, the article considers practical opportunities for Russian-Japanese scientific cooperation and the potential role of science diplomacy in maintaining bilateral interaction in the Arctic.



Perspectives as a Scientist

In response to this criticism, the author would like to pose the following question: «If a “free and open Arctic Ocean” were to become navigable for foreign vessels, completely devoid of Russia’s route management, guidance, and regulations, who would determine the optimal navigation route for each vessel on the NSR, and how, so that captains could decide their course?» The definition of «optimal» used in this question may vary depending on the perspective.

First, in terms of bunker costs, the most economically viable route for both charterers and shipowners is generally the shortest one. However, in the case of the Arctic Ocean, continuous consideration must be given to the thickness, distribution, and drift of sea ice. This also applies to operating crews, who are required to determine navigable routes based on ice conditions and the vessel’s propulsion and icebreaking capabilities. It has been reported that the speed of sea-ice drift can reach 1–2 knots and, under extreme conditions, up to 9 knots [5]. If ice conditions exceed a vessel’s icebreaking capability, there is a risk that the vessel may become immobilized.

Consequently, maritime accidents remain a major concern in the Arctic Ocean. More than 500 maritime accidents were reported in the Arctic over the decade examined by Fedi et al. [6]. For the period from 2021 onward, Arctic shipping patterns have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, Western sanctions against Russia, and broader geopolitical tensions. These developments have also changed the composition of international traffic along the Northern Sea Route. Consequently, an analysis of changes in accident rates during this later period is beyond the scope of the present article.

Nevertheless, navigation in the Arctic Ocean without effective traffic management, guidance, and appropriate regulation would entail considerable risks associated with sea ice and other navigational hazards. Even if the costs of rescue operations in such events are covered by shipowners or insurance companies, such incidents may increase voyage duration and fuel costs. Furthermore, rescue operations require vessels, equipment, personnel, and fuel from the responsible coastal states. From this perspective, preventing such incidents from occurring in the first place is of considerable importance.

Conversely, when turning our attention to the «jurisdiction to protect the marine environment» stipulated in Article 234 of UNCLOS regarding ice-covered areas, as mentioned above, it is important to consider the environmental rationale for such regulation. Article 234 allows coastal states, under specified conditions, to adopt and enforce non-discriminatory laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction, and control of marine pollution from vessels in ice-covered areas. At the same time, such regulations must have due regard to navigation and to the protection and preservation of the marine environment based on the best available scientific evidence [7]. The application and interpretation of Article 234 in the context of the ongoing reduction of Arctic sea-ice cover have also become an important subject of legal debate   [8]. In this regard, the author wishes to raise the following related questions: «If the Northern Sea Route becomes accessible to foreign vessels under a “free and open Arctic Ocean” — completely devoid of Russian route management, guidance, and regulations — what actions can individual vessels take on the NSR to protect the marine environment? Furthermore, who would determine the optimal navigation routes for environmental protection purposes, how would they do so, and how could captains then decide on their specific route to minimize environmental damage?»

The marine environment of the Arctic encompasses a wide range of sensitive ecosystems. The Arctic Ocean provides habitats for numerous species adapted to its unique environmental conditions, while sea ice itself is an important component of the Arctic ecosystem and the global climate system.

Previous research has demonstrated that turbulence in seawater can contribute to ice melting [9]. Although this study concerns the Ross Ice Shelf in Antarctica rather than the Arctic Ocean, it provides relevant evidence of the relationship between water turbulence and ice melting. The specific effects of ship-induced turbulence on Arctic sea ice, however, require further investigation. Icebreaking navigation may also produce physical disturbances to sea ice and the surrounding marine environment.

Large-scale environmental observations have been conducted through cooperation between Rosatom and the Marine Research Center of Lomonosov Moscow State University. Since 2021, this programme has focused on monitoring the environmental condition of the NSR water area and developing measures to reduce potential negative impacts on the environment [10].

An important component of these studies concerns marine mammals and birds inhabiting the NSR area. Animals such as polar bears and seals use sea ice for migration, hunting, and resting. The passage of vessels and icebreakers may disturb their habitats and behaviour. Observations conducted within the Rosatom-MSU environmental monitoring programme therefore contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between shipping activity and Arctic biodiversity [10, 11].
The significance of these studies lies in their use of direct observations and the accumulation of environmental data rather than reliance on assumptions alone. Climate change and the continuing transformation of Arctic ecosystems already place considerable pressure on ice-dependent species. Shipping represents an additional anthropogenic factor whose environmental effects need to be systematically monitored and assessed.

At the same time, marine mammals are not evenly distributed throughout the Arctic, and their locations may change as a result of seasonal migration. If concentrations of animals are located away from shipping routes and areas affected by icebreaking, some potential impacts can be reduced. Therefore, environmentally responsible route planning requires information not only on current observations but also, where possible, on the distribution and movement of Arctic species over time. Such routes are difficult to determine solely on the basis of shipboard watches or radar observations.

In recent years, environmental monitoring along the NSR has increasingly incorporated satellite observations, field research, and digital technologies. By 2023, the comprehensive environmental and biodiversity monitoring programme covering the NSR included observations of marine mammals and birds, field studies in major port areas, and the collection and analysis of environmental data [11]. These technologies and accumulated scientific data have the potential to contribute to more environmentally responsible navigation along the Northern Sea Route.

When the observational results, accumulated analyses, and information on animal distribution and migration obtained through these studies up to 2023 were first presented to the author, the author of this article proposed that such scientific knowledge should be applied to environmentally responsible navigation systems. The author was subsequently informed that relevant technologies had already been developed and that work was underway to integrate scientific and environmental considerations into the broader framework for NSR navigation.

From the author’s perspective, the integration of systematic data acquisition, environmental observation, predictive analysis, and navigational guidance demonstrates how scientific knowledge can contribute to both navigational safety and environmental protection along the Northern Sea Route. The development of this approach also provides an important basis for scientific dialogue between Russia and Japan regarding the principles and practical requirements of environmentally responsible Arctic navigation.



The Way toward Mutual Understanding

Against this background, the author proposes that scientific and technological approaches developed for environmentally responsible navigation could, in the longer term, contribute not only to Russia’s domestic regulatory framework but also to broader international discussions on Arctic navigation and environmental protection. When the author previously raised the possibility of promoting such approaches internationally, the response was: «Since anything Russia does nowadays faces backlash, it would be quite difficult».

The discussion in Japan referred to at the beginning of this article illustrates the broader political context in which such proposals are currently considered. Differences between Russia and Japan regarding Arctic navigation cannot be separated entirely from the overall state of bilateral relations, including historical and territorial issues and wider diplomatic and geopolitical tensions. At the same time, the debate over the NSR also involves questions of freedom of navigation, shipping costs and efficiency, environmental protection, and the scientific and technological foundations of safe Arctic navigation [12, 13].

However, maintaining distance and mutual criticism is unlikely to contribute to overcoming these differences. Just as even the most intricately tangled threads have a point from which they can begin to be untangled, there should be ways to address the problems discussed in this article.
The author is convinced that one such way is to maintain dialogue and gradually rebuild mutual trust through scientific cooperation. Science provides researchers from different countries with a common professional language and allows specific problems to be discussed on the basis of observations, data, and research results. This corresponds to the broader concept of science diplomacy, in which scientific cooperation can contribute to maintaining channels of communication and building trust even when political relations are constrained [14, 15].

If questions remain regarding route guidance, environmental monitoring, or other aspects of Arctic navigation, the author therefore proposes that Japanese Arctic researchers could participate in joint research aboard Russian icebreakers and research vessels, conduct collaborative investigations of Arctic environmental conditions, exchange observational data, and subsequently prepare joint scientific publications. Such cooperation would make it possible to examine disputed issues through direct scientific observation rather than solely through political or media interpretations.

There are, however, substantial institutional constraints on such cooperation. A significant proportion of Japanese scientists engaged in Arctic research are affiliated with national research institutions or universities, including the National Institute of Polar Research (NIPR), the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), Hokkaido University, and the University of Tokyo. These institutions have played an important role in Japan’s Arctic research and in the development of international scientific cooperation [16].

The present geopolitical situation has nevertheless made direct academic interaction with Russia considerably more difficult. Japan has introduced a series of sanctions against Russia since 2022, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan continues to issue travel advice concerning travel to Russia [17]. These circumstances, together with institutional risk assessments and practical difficulties associated with travel and financial transactions, create additional barriers to direct scientific exchanges. It would therefore be more accurate to describe the present situation not as a legal prohibition on academic contacts, but as an environment in which institutional and practical constraints substantially limit opportunities for cooperation.

At the same time, channels for people-to-people and academic dialogue have not disappeared completely. A noteworthy example was the visit of Yohei Sasakawa, Honorary Chairman of The Nippon Foundation, to Moscow in September 2025. During his meetings in Russia, Sasakawa emphasized the importance of maintaining future-oriented people-to-people exchanges even when Japan-Russia relations at the governmental level remain difficult. He specifically identified academic, cultural, and sporting exchanges as areas in which private-level interaction could contribute to improving bilateral relations [18]. Such initiatives demonstrate that non-governmental and academic channels may continue to provide opportunities for dialogue even under adverse political conditions.

The key point is therefore that scientific interaction between Russia and Japan, although considerably more difficult than in the past, remains possible. Under current conditions, building professional trust, exchanging scientific information, and maintaining direct contacts between researchers acquire particular importance. Rather than attempting immediately to restore the previous scale of cooperation, it may be more realistic to develop specific, practically oriented projects in areas where the two sides share scientific interests.

An important opportunity in this regard is associated with Japan’s new Arctic research vessel Mirai II. JAMSTEC is developing Mirai II as Japan’s first Arctic research vessel with icebreaking capabilities and as an international research platform intended to facilitate international cooperation in Arctic observations [19]. The vessel is scheduled to be delivered in November 2026, with its first Arctic Ocean observation cruise currently planned for the summer of 2027 [20]. JAMSTEC has explicitly emphasized international collaboration as one of the central elements of the Mirai II project and has already organized international workshops devoted to future cooperation among research vessels and icebreakers [21].

In the author’s view, the future operation of Mirai II could provide an opportunity to reconsider possibilities for Russian-Japanese scientific interaction in the Arctic. Any research activities involving navigation in areas subject to Russian NSR regulations would naturally require careful consideration of the applicable legal, navigational, and environmental requirements. At the same time, participation by Russian researchers and ice-navigation specialists in appropriate international research activities could contribute to the exchange of observational data and experience and to a better mutual understanding of approaches to safe and environmentally responsible Arctic navigation.

Ultimately, the author hopes that such cooperation could contribute not only to addressing environmental and navigational challenges in the Arctic Ocean but also to the development of science diplomacy between Japan and Russia. Joint research cannot by itself resolve broader political disagreements. It can, however, preserve professional communication, generate shared scientific knowledge, and contribute to rebuilding mutual trust. In this sense, scientific cooperation may remain one of the practical channels through which Russia and Japan can maintain constructive interaction in the Arctic even under difficult geopolitical conditions.



Conclusion

This article has examined the prospects for Russian-Japanese scientific cooperation in the Arctic in the context of differing approaches to the regulation of navigation along the Northern Sea Route. These differences reflect not only political considerations but also different perceptions of the relationship between freedom of navigation, navigational safety, coastal-state jurisdiction, and environmental protection.

The analysis suggests that science diplomacy can remain a practical channel of communication between Russia and Japan even when broader political relations are constrained. Joint research, environmental monitoring, scientific data exchange, and professional dialogue can contribute to a better understanding of approaches to safe and environmentally responsible Arctic navigation. The new Japanese Arctic research vessel Mirai II may provide additional opportunities for such international scientific cooperation.

Scientific cooperation cannot resolve broader political disagreements, but it can preserve professional communication, generate shared knowledge, reduce misunderstandings, and gradually rebuild mutual trust. In this sense, the Northern Sea Route can become not only an area of differing Russian and Japanese approaches, but also a practical field for science diplomacy and the gradual development of constructive bilateral cooperation in the Arctic.