Monday, 16 January 2012 14:51 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

An Arctic Tern lands on a fence by the scientific base at the Arctic settlement of Ny-Alesund, Norway, in the Svalbard archipelago. Photo: Martin Bureau, AFP.

It’s the time of year when bloggers indulge themselves by offering predictions, and I shall be no different.  The Arctic’s past belonged to peoples, and the present goes to states, but I will predict that the future will see big oil companies as the primary actor in Arctic affairs.

One of the big stories in Arctic geopolitics in the past four years is the development of the ‘Arctic Five’, or A5 (the five states that have coastlines bordering the Arctic Ocean including Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Norway, Russia and USA) beginning with the May 2008 meeting in Ilulissat, Greenland. 

Friday, 09 December 2011 16:12 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

The remains of a Canadian flag can be seen flying over a building in Attawapiskat, Ont. Tuesday November 29, 2011. Adrian Wyld, The Canadian Press.

The issue of living standards in northern and remote communities was brought into focus in the past month as the Chief of the Attawapiskat reserve in northern Ontario, Theresa Spence, declared a state of emergency to attract attention to the appalling living conditions faced by her reserve’s 1500 residents.  Perhaps predictably, the episode seems to have brought out the worst in both sides, federal vs First Nation, left vs right, white vs aboriginal, all of whom seem to have chosen to engage in finger-pointing rather than heavy lifting.    

I have never been to Attawapiskat, and had not heard of it before October 28^th, and so cannot plausibly contend that I know who or what has led it to this point.  To paraphrase Tolstoy, all happy communities are alike, but unhappy communities are all unhappy in their own way, and Attawapiskat seems to have a lot of unhappiness. 

Friday, 28 October 2011 00:00 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

 

Last week, the federal government announced that it will be cutting its funding to the University of the Arctic from a current annual rate of $700,00 to $150,000.  Some commentators presented this as evidence that the federal government does not care, or does not care very much, about northern education.  One might wonder instead why the federal government, and in particular the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT), was supporting UArctic in the North instead of the three territorial governments, education being a provincial/territorial responsibility after all.

As many readers know, Canada is the only circumpolar country not to have a university in its Arctic region.  This is inevitably linked to the fact that Canada’s northern population is sparser and smaller than that of any of its seven Arctic neighbours, and so a northern university would be more expensive to run, staff and operate, and still be hundreds of thousands of kilometers away from the bulk of its intended students.  Thus, when UArctic came about as a means to reflect and support growing international cooperation in the Arctic region in the 1990s, it was only natural that Canada supported UArctic’s undergraduate program, the Bachelor of Circumpolar Studies (BCS), rather than one of its other programs, such as an international student exchange program, administration, field schools or research.  DFAIT supported the BCS program for eight years.  Part of the reason it failed is because no one else did.

Wednesday, 05 October 2011 23:04 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

Some northerners have argued that their communities should have the same level of government services as southerners – no more and no less.  But of course that is impossible.   Northern Canadians will never have the same level of services as southern Canadians, not because they are northern, or aboriginal, but because they are rural.  A gap exists around the world in the level of development between those who live in urban areas and those who live in rural areas, and it is unlikely to get smaller.  That is why migration is almost exclusively in the direction of rural to urban no matter what country you live in.

Monday, 29 August 2011 15:16 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

Last week, the Kingdom of Denmark (Denmark, Greenland and the Faroe Islands) released its Strategy for the Arctic.  This marks a culmination of a three year period in which each of the circumpolar states – Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States, as well as the EU - established new Arctic policies in face of the region’s rapidly evolving geopolitical situation.  While this in itself is significant, the most startling thing is the level of consensus articulated in these nine Arctic policies.  For all of the region’s diversity of interests, values, resources and cultures, when it comes to Arctic policy everyone is saying pretty much the same things.

Wednesday, 17 August 2011 12:54 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

There are many remarkable things about the Arctic: its unique environment, wildlife, inhabitants and culture.  Lesser known is the remarkable transition the Arctic has undergone in less than twenty-five years from a peripheral Cold War theatre to a geopolitical region.  Almost every other region in the world (think Europe, Africa, Southeast Asia or the Middle East) has longstanding historical and cultural ties, and an interdependence that has evolved around trade and/or traditional security.   What makes the Arctic region so unique is that interdependence evolved so rapidly, from a situation of very limited cross-border linkages, around common issues and challenges in environmental and cultural security.  In this, it is a reflection of the post-Cold War world order.

How did the Arctic become a ‘region’ - what Joseph Nye has described as “a limited number of states linked by a geographical relationship and by a degree of mutual interdependence”?   The geographical relationship between Canada, Denmark (Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States (Alaska) has always existed, inasmuch as they jointly straddle the circumpolar.  But their interdependence is new.  

Tuesday, 19 July 2011 14:07 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

Last month, the education ministers of the three territories signed an MoU expressing their commitment to explore joint strategies for university development in the North.  This is not a new issue – a University of Canada North was first proposed in the 1970s – but it is one that has never been satisfactorily resolved.

There is no doubt that university education is a critical component in the economic, social and political development of a region, and that the territories would benefit from it.  Among other things, universities build capacity in the labour force, promoting economic development and good governance.  They provide research that reflects the needs of the area in which they operate.  And they provide an independent third party that can monitor, criticize and support governments, something that is indispensable in a democracy. 

Wednesday, 15 June 2011 12:45 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

Quebec Premier Jean Charest responds to Opposition questions over the Northern Plan Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at the legislature in Quebec City. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jacques Boissinot

In the puzzle that is northern economic development, two pieces presented themselves in the past few weeks: the province of Quebec’s ambitious Plan Nord, a 25-year mega-plan covering everything from jobs to the environment; and the Inuit Circumpolar Council’s conservative Declaration on Resource Development Principles. 

Plan Nord, announced by Premier Jean Charest and a host of other ministers and community leaders, seeks to transform the northern part of the province over a period of 25 years and engender investments of over $80 billion. It aims to create or consolidate 20,000 jobs a year and generate $14 billion in revenue for the government and Quebec society, all while promoting environmental sustainability and community well-being.  The initial, committed investment from the province is $2.1 billion over five years, no small sum, that could prove a true catalyst for regional economic development. Critics have derided it as colonial, environmentally irresponsible, and wasteful of public funds. But I can think of a number of northern districts who could only dream of such investment and attention. 

Monday, 16 May 2011 16:48 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

Last week, I asked if Arctic policy was in a funk.  I got my answer with the very encouraging Nuuk Declaration from the Arctic Council ministerial on Thursday – not only is Arctic policy not in a funk, it is alive, well, and progressing.       

Ministers from the eight Arctic states, as well as the representatives of the indigenous Permanent Participants, met in Greenland for the biennial Arctic Council Ministerial, which is hosted on a rotational basis.  (After Sweden’s chairmanship, which it adopts this week, the rotation will begin anew with Canada.)  The meeting’s major deliverable was the signing of a legally binding agreement on Search and Rescue (SAR). That this would happen was well known in advance and has taken years of work; in itself the agreement is not particularly groundbreaking or consequential in terms of how search and rescue will actually occur.  But from an Arctic policy perspective, it is massively significant because it the first legally binding instrument negotiated by the Arctic Council in its 15 year existence.  As such it 1) marks a transition of the Arctic Council from a soft law to a hard law body; 2) indicates a deepening, rather than stagnation, of the circumpolar regionalization process; and 3) makes the Arctic Council seem relevant again.  In that sense, while the SAR agreement is no panacea for the many ills of the region – not even the SAR ones - it is a critically important first step towards more effective regional governance.

Monday, 09 May 2011 15:50 Written by Heather Exner-Pirot

The Aspen Institute recently launched a report on Arctic Climate Change.  Among the usual suspects involved were Sheila Watt-Cloutier and Patricia Cochran, former Inuit Circumpolar Council presidents; Lloyd Axworthy, the former Liberal Foreign Affairs Minister who oversaw the establishment of the Arctic Council and initiated Canada’s Northern Dimension of Foreign Policy in 2000; and various other VIPs including Prince Albert of Monaco (!).  

The report is well-intentioned and well written.  But at the risk of sounding like a crank, it must be said that the most striking thing about the report is that it could have been written in 2007. 

Its key finding is that Arctic governments should take immediate steps to develop a conservation and sustainable development plan for the Arctic marine environment – although the WWF put out its report on Arctic marine governance in 2008.  It also seeks to 1) include indigenous peoples in Arctic governance (see Arctic Council, Establishment of, 1996); 2) promote cooperation in Arctic science (International Polar Year, 1882-83; 1957-58 and 2007-09?); 3) foster networks between government and civil society (this pretty much describes the public policy focus of the region since the 1990s); and 4) strengthen the Arctic Council (Norway tried to do so, unsuccessfully, during its chairmanship of the Arctic Council from 2006-09).