Arctic Policy for Canada's Tomorrow

Abstract

As a result of climate change, a new region is opening up. The melting ofthe polar ice in the Arctic, however slow it may be, unlocks huge reserves of minerals and hydrocarbons, makes new coastal passages navigable, and changes northerners' way of life. At the same time, the risks of intrusion, of pollution, and of environmental deterioration grow. No wonder that these developments have spurred a lively debate in every country, especially in Canada, which has an extensive frontier on the Ocean and large land holdings in the polar region. Diverging interests and competing claims in the could potentially lead to regional conflicts.Three well-known Canadian experts on the - Franklyn Griffiths of the University of Toronto, Rob Huebert from Calgary, and F. Whitney Lackenbauer from Waterloo - have written a series of well-thought- through papers on the future ofthe Arctic.1 They want to start Canadians on their way to discussing and designing an adequate strategy. The terminology of all three contributions, however, is slightly confusing, at least to a foreigner. The authors use the term Arctic alternatively for the Canadian - the country's polar region stretching of the Circle (66° 30'), the territory of the 10° C isotherm in July - and the lands beyond the tree line.2 In this piece, Arctic will connote the larger, circumpolar region, and north the Canadian north. In a similar mode, the terms are applicable to the Norwegian or the Russian north.Following this terminology, northern strategy, recently published by Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada, focuses mainly on the Canadian north.3 In but eight short paragraphs on its international dimensions, the strategy emphasizes effective Canadian of its sovereignty in the face of new challenges and highlights Canada's willingness to work closely with its northern neighbours. Otherwise, the document offers a shopping list of programs that had been commissioned earlier. The critical question, though, is whether the government will follow through. Doubts about its willingness lend credibility to our authors' complaints that Canada is badly equipped for the international challenges of the and needs a really new, proactive strategy to cope with them.DESIGNING A NEW CANADIAN ARCTIC STRATEGYAll three authors agree that climate change is transforming the polar region to an astonishing degree and that Canada has a great deal at stake. Griffiths is most ambitious in calling for a far-reaching Canadian strategy that channels the unfolding story of the region towards muting conflict and enabling everyone to exercise due care in exploiting and enjoying the shared natural environment. He argues that Canadian sovereignty is in good shape and will stay this way unless regional developments plunge it into a politicalmilitary rivalry. To prevent this, he urges building capacity in pan-Arctic collaboration and stewardship. He defines stewardship as locally informed governance that not only polices but shows respect and care for the natural environment and the living things in it. If used wisely, it will enhance national sovereignty and security in a region that is marked by a high degree of natural and human interdependence. As an alternative to treaty-based mandatory compliance and fragmented incremental implementation, Griffiths recommends voluntary coordination enhanced by agreed rules or principles of international relations. An enabling central institution of governance would greatly help - or even make possible - voluntary compliance by reviewing and coordinating cooperation on a consensual basis and providing financial assistance to projects in need.According to Griffiths, building an ever-denser web of cooperation among the states will strengthen circumpolar stewardship. Currently, the Council is but the nucleus of an regime. …