Protecting and Promoting Canadian Arctic

Sovereignty and Security

Northern Sovereignty and Political Geography in North America

The Association for Canadian Studies in the United States (ACSUS)

Washington, DC, June 14, 2010

Rob Huebert

Rhuebert@ucalgary.ca

Centre for Military and Strategic Studies

Main Themes

• A New Arctic International Region is Forming on a Global Basis

• The Arctic is a state of massive transformation – Climate Change– Resource Development – (was up to a high

$140+ barrel of oil- now $80 barrel)– Geopolitical Transformation/Globalization

Main Questions

• What is the impact of a Globalizing Arctic on Canadian Arctic Relations?

• What is the nature of this new region? Are we witnessing the birth of an Arctic Arms Race? Or is it a new Co-operative Arctic Regime?

• How does it impact “old” issues for Canada?• How does it create new issues/opportunities

for Canada?

Sovereignty and SecurityTwo Interdependent Concepts

• Sovereignty for Canada by itself is Meaningless– Sovereignty is a means and not an end– Canadian tendency (academic, policy and

public) to separate the two interdependent concepts

• Sovereignty must be used to I) Provide Security for CanadiansII) Allow for the provision and promotion of Canadian well-being

Security in the Canadian Arctic

Traditional

Security

Traditional

Security/

Non-Traditional Security

Non-Traditional Security

Military Policing Environmental

Diplomatic Economic

Cultural

Confounding Nature of Arctic Sovereignty and Security

• Non-linear Progression of Factors– Hard to understand interaction of change– Events can occur very quickly eg. Economic

crisis/oil spills– Tendency to believe if things are going well

now they will continue to go well

• Complexity of North– Will remain a very expensive and difficult

region to operate in

Issue 1: Legal Status of Northern Waterways: Northwest Passage

• Canadian position – Internal Waters

• US/EU position – International Strait

• Issue is over Control of Trans-Polar Shipping

• 2 main incidents 1969/70; 1985– 1969 Manhattan was test run for Alaska Oil– 1985 Polar Sea was operational voyage

Northwest Passages

Issue 2: Arctic Maritime Boundary Disputes: Beaufort Sea

• Beaufort Sea : Canada and US

• Control of Resources; Determination of Environmental Standards

Issue 3: US Multi-Lateral Reluctance versus Canadian Promotion

• Finland and Canada versus US – Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS)

• Canada vs US - Arctic Council– Role of northern P(p)eople(s)– Treaty versus Agreement– Environment versus Comprehensive– Permanent Secretariat versus Volunteer

The New Issues/Opportunities

• Climate Change and Melting Ice

• Economic Promise/Environmental Challenges

• Changing International Law

• Changing Geopolitical Realties

The Image of Change: AccessibilityThe Melting Ice:

Movement of Ice Sept 2007-April 2008

Source: Canadian Ice Service

Oil and Gas

The Economics: The Hope of ResourcesOil and Gas: Resources of the North

Source: AMAP

US Geological Survey Arctic 2008

• To determine the sources of traditional energy supplies

• 30% of undiscovered Natural Gas in Arctic– Mainly in Eurasian Arctic

• 13% of undiscovered Oil in Arctic– Mainly in North American Arctic

New Oil and Gas Activity –North America

• Exxon/Mobil, Imperial - Cdn Beaufort Sea/Mackenzie Delta: $585 million five years 2008-2013

• BP – Cdn Beaufort Sea/Mackenzie Delta: $1.2 billion

• Shell – off Alaska North Slope– Currently preparing for drilling

But Change comes quickly..

• Shale Gas• US as gas exporter?

• Deepwater Horizon• April 2010 • Will BP survive?

Uncertain Maritime jurisdiction & boundaries in the Arctic

www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/resources/arctic

Canadian Effort for Article 76

Natural Resources Canada

Canada US Cooperation Article 76

CGS Louis St. Laurent and USS Healy

But Continued Disagreements…

New Multi-Lateral Attention

• Arctic Treaty versus Existing Framework

• Ilulissat Meeting 2008– Role of UNCLOS– Issue of US membership

• Chelsea Quebec 2010 – US critique of Canada– A5 not “inclusive”

New Geopolitics of the North• Russia

– Renewed Assertiveness/ Petrodollars• United States

– Multi-lateral reluctance/emerging concern to act– International Role as remaining Superpower

• Norway– Refocus on North/ Growing Interest (Concern?) with Russia

• Denmark– Issues with Greenland – social; energy– Rebuilding Armed Forces

• Iceland– Economic melt-down/Volcano melt-down

• Finland/Sweden– Closer cooperation with NATO

• Canada– Re-examining its Arctic capabilities– Renewed Assertiveness

Policy Statements• United States

– National Security Presidential Directive 66 Arctic Region Policy (January 9 2009)

– USN Arctic Roadmap • Russia

– Russian State Rearmament Programme 2007-2015– Principles of State Policy in the Arctic to 2020, (September, 2008)[

• Norway– The Soria Moria Declaration on International Policy,”(April 2007) – Norwegian Defence 2008 (June 2008):

• Canada– Northern Strategy (July 2009)

• Denmark– Danish Defence Agreement 2010-2014 Copenhagen (June 2009)

Source: http://cmss.ucalgary.ca/foreignpolicy

New and Developing Arctic Force Capabilities

• Russia– 6 - Borey SSBN; 2- Yasen SSN; 5-6 Carrier Groups;

New Bomber 2020

• United States– F-22, Virginia class; ABM

• Norway– Fridtjof Nansen Frigates; F-35; Svalbard

• Canada– Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessels

• Denmark– Navy: Thesis; Knud Ramussen; Flyvefisken classes

Exercises

• Russia– 8-9,000 troops 09; 2 Delta’s IV 09; Bomber Patrols

• United States– Northern Edge – 1993-09; 8-10,000 troops

• Norway– Cold Response -2006-2010; 7-8,000 troops

• Canada– Op Nanook 2002-2009 – 750 troops

• Finland/Sweden– Loyal Arrow 2009 3000 troops

Renewed Russian Strengths

• 1990’s Period of Reduction– AMEC/G-8 assistance in Sub Decommissioning

• 2000’s Renewal • Russian State Rearmament Programme

2007-2015• 6 SSBN 995 Borey • 2 SSN 885 Yasen• 6 Diesel 677 Lada

Yury Dolgoruky

Resumption of Russian TU-95 (Bear) Arctic Flights, August 18, 2007

• If US/EU position on Northwest Passage is correct then these aircraft have the right of over-flight

•Replacement announced to be built by 2020

US Arctic Forces

• Submarine Forces:– Seawolf and Los Angles Class– Virginia Class is now ice capable

• Missile Development– Missile Defence – Ft Greely

USS Honolulu 2003 USS Texas 2009

Deployment of F-22 to Alaska

• 186 F-22 to be built

• 36 are being deployed

to Alaska

• 20% of total arsenal

Fort Greely – Delta Junction

“New” US Concerns

• National Security Presidential Directive 66/

Arctic Region Policy (January 9 2009)• “The United States is prepared to operate either

independently or in conjunction with other states to safe-guard these interests” – missile defence and early warning;

– deployment of sea and air systems for strategic sealift, strategic deterrence, maritime presence, and maritime security operations;

– ensuring freedom of navigation and over-flight.

US Arctic Exercises Northern Edge

• Annual US northern military exercise

• Annual even June 1993-2004; 2006-2009

• 10,000-8,000 troops

• 200 aircraft

• 1 aircraft carrier

Arrival of New Actors

• European Union– Membership on Arctic Council

• China– Polar Bases: 2 ½ Antarctica; 1 Arctic

– Arctic Vessels – Xue Long; 10,000 ton new research icebreaker

– Interests: Climate Change; Navigation; Resources

– Membership on Arctic Council

Canadian Arctic Policy

• New Military Operations since 2002• 6-8 Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessels• Nanisivik Refueling Facility• Resolute Bay Training Facility• Increased Rangers Patrols 4000 to 5000

-Number 58 to 61-Training and Equipment

• Northern Watch• Throne Speech Oct 2007

– Northern Strategy (Sovereignty/Security)

Canadian Security Actions (cont.)

• Feb 2008 Budget – $720 Million Icebreaker • June 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy

(Harper White Paper)• Arctic Strategy July 2009

- One of four pillars on Arctic Sovereignty and Security

• Postponement (Cancelation?) of Joint Support Vessels

• Mandatory Reporting of Ship Traffic – Nordreg (shipping season 2010)

Arctic Offshore Patrol Vessel

Be capable of operations in Canada’s three oceans

Be first year ice capable in the Arctic

Contribute to maritime domn awareness

Support other departments, agencies and ocean research

Have a gun armament for constabulary missions

15

General Arrangements – Upper Deck

Source: Canadian Navy

Resolute Bay

Canadian Base Location

Iqaluit

Ft. Greely

St. John’s

Alert

Yellowknife

Where are Canada and US Headed?

• Circumpolar states have called for cooperation– What will be the new international governance

regime?• Circumpolar states are building up their combat

capable force for the Arctic– New Equipment – Ice and Combat Capable– New Policies – Unilateral “concern” – New Training

Conclusion

• Geopolitics Concerns reduced immediately after end of Cold War

• New concerns are arising as Arctic is perceived/becoming more accessible

• Issues will be Maritime/Aerospace• Issue will be understanding intent of old and new

actors in the region• Canada-US need to have a new “Arctic”

Understanding

Conclusion: What Does Canada and US Do?

• Will need to resolve old boundary disputes

• Will need to coordinate on Arctic Governance

• Canada needs to ensure that its has a full and robust Surveillance and Enforcement Capability for the Arctic