 |
An ice-free and navigable Northwest Passage not only opens up the possibility of trade routes but also environmental and cultural destruction in the delicate Arctic ecosystem.
|
|
 |
|
Taking the Northwest Passage
Experts stress the importance of answering Arctic sovereignty questions sooner rather than later
By Jackie Wallace
As polar ice melts and the dispute over Arctic sovereignty heats up, so does Canada’s
security in its identity as “the true North strong and free.”
The looming possibility of an increasingly ice-free Arctic has turned global attention to
the Canadian North, specifically to the promise of the lucrative shipping shortcut of a passable
Northwest Passage. Stephen Harper’s election promises to reassert sovereignty over
the North were cause for the newly-elected prime minister’s first run-in with David
Wilkins, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, when Wilkins dismissed the new government’s
Arctic intentions and Canada’s claim to the waters.
"The thing about sovereignty is that you either use it
or you lose it."
—Michael Byers |
“The thing about sovereignty is that you either use it or you lose it,” says Michael
Byers, who holds a Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law at the Liu
Institute for Global Issues at the University of British Columbia. This exact sentiment was
shared by prime minister-designate Stephen Harper when he defended Canada’s right to
defend its sovereignty in responding to Wilkins’ statements, thrusting Arctic sovereignty
to the top of the agenda of Canada / U.S. relations.
Byers’ work focuses on establishing sovereignty and regulations for the Passage amid
changing ice conditions. He combines scientific analysis with legal elements to establish
a timeline of when the Passage would be passable. Some estimates postulate the Passage could
be ice-free during the summer months within a decade, while more conservative climate models
project a passable waterway by 2080.
But not everyone sees the issue of Arctic sovereignty as a meteorological race against time. “The
global warming statement is grossly overstated,” says Franklyn Griffiths, professor
emeritus of political science at the University of Toronto and formerly the first incumbent
of the Ignatieff Chair of Peace and Conflict Studies. Griffiths also points out that global
warming would bring the unpredictability of moving ice rather than totally ice-free conditions,
causing issues such as delay, liability, increased insurance and other costs that would continue
to be prohibitive to companies looking for a viable shipping route. “As a business
proposition, it is not going to happen,” he says.
"The global warming statement is grossly overstated."
—Franklyn Griffiths |
Griffiths also questions Canada’s motivation for sovereignty, as he sees the current
push North as a knee-jerk reaction to U.S. threats. "I don’t think sovereignty works
very well to develop policy," he says. "We should get a constant purpose instead of reacting
and move forward with our ambition, not our fear."
Despite approaching the issue from different perspectives, Griffiths and Byers agree that
maintaining sovereignty is the best way to protect the region’s delicate ecosystem
from environmental disasters, maintain traditional Inuit culture, and protect our border. "The
first thing to do is to convert voluntary registration for vessels in the Arctic to be mandatory," says
Byers. "This already exists on the east and west coasts." He sees unauthorized transits as
the biggest threat to undermine Canadian sovereignty. "An unauthorized transit demonstrates
that the Canadian position is nothing but words."
“We want to encourage safe, secure shipping. It is not
a question of keeping out legitimate use, but keeping out misuse.”
—Michael Byers |
Griffiths sees the need for more surveillance in the region, complimented by satellite and
bathymetric information in order to prepare for potential environmental disasters. He also
supports a military presence that can be deployed quickly for emergencies and search and rescue.
Byers agrees with the need for military helicopters to be stationed in the region, particularly
in the ice-free summer months, to give the capacity to enforce laws by allowing military to
board unauthorized vessels.
“The most compelling argument that Ottawa can make to Washington is that Canadian
law would be stronger than international laws to protect defence interests,” says Byers.
Griffiths agrees saying that “we should be talking with the U.S. and coming to terms
now.”
“We want to encourage safe, secure shipping,” says Byers. “It is not
a question of keeping out legitimate use, but keeping out misuse.”
top
|
